Can we stop referring to households making $200 or 300K a year as "middle class"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC is not the only expensive spot in the country, you idiots.

No kidding. DC is one of the most prosperous and vibrant metro areas in the country. And it's not as if $300,000 a year goes further in Manhattan or Westchester County, Chicago's North Shore, the Bay Area, L.A.'s West Side, etc.

So what if it "goes further" in Omaha, Dallas or Phoenix? These cities lack DC's opportunities and cultural amenities and DC's high price is largely because affluent people disproportionately live in it. And either way, in no region in the country is $300,000 not a very high income.

[Anonymous]

300k three kids. Living month to month.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course I am proud of my achievements. I live a disciplined life of hard work, with long hours and tireless dedication. I pay a huge amount in taxes each year, and the lifestyle I live is not fabulous, just marginally better than the average middle class. Yet at every opportunity, liberal politicians label me as the rich, they claim I don't pay my fair share. They use their position of power to rally the masses against the likes of me in order to advance their agenda. People like you then pile on top telling me how good I have it. Yes, I have it good, but it's not as good as you imagine it. I am more like you than I am like someone in the top 0.5%. We share the same concerns, we have the same need to stay working to support a family.

God, you're ridiculous. You make it sound as soon as if you make a dollar over $250K, you'd have to hand half your income to the IRS. Not to mention your TAXABLE income is always less than your net income. If you make say, $270K, you're not likely to be any more in taxes at all, or if not a pittance. One can debate the merits of raising taxes on very high incomes, but this idea that you'd be significantly impacted in any way is ridiculous.

You are, of course, wrong. Here's a graph of the effective tax rate by income:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/effective%20tax%20rates%20by%20income%20group%202009.png

Note the drastic increase in taxes as you go from 100k to 500k per year in income. This is because at this income level, you hit the highest percent marginal bracket and deductions start fading away.

[Anonymous]

^ I'm sure you'd happily trade places with someone making less then, since those burdensome taxes make earning on incomes 4 or 5 times the national average isn't worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:300k three kids. Living month to month.

Then you have made poor choices.

I get that these higher incomes don't feel like that much to many in the 200-300 bracket but it is a lot. My family lived on a income of about $100k for 7 yrs when I was a SAHM and Now we make about $240k between my going back to work and DH's raises. Sure, taxes and childcare take some but we are substantially better off at this higher income -- we were able to do a significant renovation of our house, increased retirement savings, setting aside college savings, travel a bit more, and overall just not have to think as much about money day to day. Much of our extended family is truly middle class, living in modest homes in smaller cities with less ability to save for emergencies, retirement, and college, and have those little daily luxuries without thinkIng about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I can relate to this. It's just very hard to be told that because I make $200K I am a bank for wealth redistribution. It is further galling that the rate that will be applied to my $200K in DC would be the same as the rate applied to someone making $200K in say, Oklahoma, where the cost of living is significantly less. Everyone seems to want a piece of me, from repair people to child care providers, all because I live in N. Bethesda. I know I should be grateful, but it is tiresome to be told I am rich, when I have to count every penny to make sure my kids can go to college because we won't get any aid, because people think I am rich. Again, if I could make half that and move to Iowa, I would to get away from all the hubbub of DC. This place is ridiculous. And, unfortunately, I don't get to leave my work at the office. It follows me home by virtue of my smartphone.

And, please don't tell me that I don't know what it is like to make virtually nothing in a high priced area. I spent 4 years in the military in a high priced region of the country knowing what it is like not to afford anything. What blows my mind is the cost of having kids in this area.

So move to Lanham. You can buy a similar size house for about 60% of what it costs you in N. Bethesda. Your mortgage will be less, the child care will be less and you'll have significantly more disposable income. You'll still have easy access to Metro but it might be easier to get to. New Carrollton Metro is about the same distance from most of Lanham as White Flint and Grosvenor are to most of N Bethesda. Orange line instead of Red. When you see how much of a premium you are paying just to live in Bethesda, then maybe you'll realize how far your money really can go. You are paying the premium for living in one of the desirable parts of town (e.g. Montgomery County) and that costs money. You are spending the money to live the richer life style of living in the popular location.

It's really gauche for the people who choose to live in the more affluent and desireable parts of town spending their money for the location and the more expensive COL in those areas crying poverty because they've spent all their money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course I am proud of my achievements. I live a disciplined life of hard work, with long hours and tireless dedication. I pay a huge amount in taxes each year, and the lifestyle I live is not fabulous, just marginally better than the average middle class. Yet at every opportunity, liberal politicians label me as the rich, they claim I don't pay my fair share. They use their position of power to rally the masses against the likes of me in order to advance their agenda. People like you then pile on top telling me how good I have it. Yes, I have it good, but it's not as good as you imagine it. I am more like you than I am like someone in the top 0.5%. We share the same concerns, we have the same need to stay working to support a family.

God, you're ridiculous. You make it sound as soon as if you make a dollar over $250K, you'd have to hand half your income to the IRS. Not to mention your TAXABLE income is always less than your net income. If you make say, $270K, you're not likely to be any more in taxes at all, or if not a pittance. One can debate the merits of raising taxes on very high incomes, but this idea that you'd be significantly impacted in any way is ridiculous.

You are, of course, wrong. Here's a graph of the effective tax rate by income:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/effective%20tax%20rates%20by%20income%20group%202009.png

Note the drastic increase in taxes as you go from 100k to 500k per year in income. This is because at this income level, you hit the highest percent marginal bracket and deductions start fading away.

So, those of us who make 100K, and bring home 85K according to that chart, should feel bad for those who make 5 X what we do but only bring home about 4.4 times as much as we do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course I am proud of my achievements. I live a disciplined life of hard work, with long hours and tireless dedication. I pay a huge amount in taxes each year, and the lifestyle I live is not fabulous, just marginally better than the average middle class. Yet at every opportunity, liberal politicians label me as the rich, they claim I don't pay my fair share. They use their position of power to rally the masses against the likes of me in order to advance their agenda. People like you then pile on top telling me how good I have it. Yes, I have it good, but it's not as good as you imagine it. I am more like you than I am like someone in the top 0.5%. We share the same concerns, we have the same need to stay working to support a family.

God, you're ridiculous. You make it sound as soon as if you make a dollar over $250K, you'd have to hand half your income to the IRS. Not to mention your TAXABLE income is always less than your net income. If you make say, $270K, you're not likely to be any more in taxes at all, or if not a pittance. One can debate the merits of raising taxes on very high incomes, but this idea that you'd be significantly impacted in any way is ridiculous.

You are, of course, wrong. Here's a graph of the effective tax rate by income:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/effective%20tax%20rates%20by%20income%20group%202009.png

Note the drastic increase in taxes as you go from 100k to 500k per year in income. This is because at this income level, you hit the highest percent marginal bracket and deductions start fading away.

So, those of us who make 100K, and bring home 85K according to that chart, should feel bad for those who make 5 X what we do but only bring home about 4.4 times as much as we do?

No one is asking for your sympathy. As another perspecitve, the folks making 100K+ have made less than you at one time. They put money away, defer gratification, etc they don't live extravagant lives...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are, of course, wrong. Here's a graph of the effective tax rate by income:

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/business/effective%20tax%20rates%20by%20income%20group%202009.png

Note the drastic increase in taxes as you go from 100k to 500k per year in income. This is because at this income level, you hit the highest percent marginal bracket and deductions start fading away.

I'm not disputing that. That's how progressive taxation works. What I'm saying is that since $250,000 seems to be the official "cutoff" (Obama, Romney both said that), people making say $300K wouldn't really be impacted that significantly if a new bracket was added at $250K since the first taxable $250K wouldn't be impacted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one is asking for your sympathy. As another perspecitve, the folks making 100K+ have made less than you at one time. They put money away, defer gratification, etc they don't live extravagant lives...

Great! They have the choice to increase their spending to match their high incomes (private school for the kids, desirable housing, luxury cars, or to put a lot into savings.. Thanks for informing us of the plight of the top 5%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:300k three kids. Living month to month.

Mike Tyson couldn't live on 25 mil. Just because you're bad with money doesn't make the point less valid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still do not understand the almost aggressive way DCUMers making $300K want to be called middle class. Why are you not proud of having achieved more than 95% of other people?

That's like telling people your kid with 4.5 GPA is an average student. It doesn't make you seem humble, it makes you seem hopelessly greedy. "I have soooooo much, but I want MORE."

I don't really get it either. I also don't get why they all sound so dissatisfied with life.

It's really self explanatory. Imagine what it would be like to have $200k/$300k income. Okay, got that mental image ready? Nice eh?

Those of us who have made it can tell you with certainty, it's not like that. You don't go from driving an Accord to driving a Ferrari. More like from an Accord to a TLX. That's why you don't get it, because we didn't get it either. Making $200k to $300k isn't what it's cracked up to be. The dream is a lie. When you wake up to reality and the outcome doesn't match expectation, well, that's a definition of dissatisfaction, isn't it?

The fact is if my salary increased that much I still wouldn't want a Ferrari because I know material things don't make you happy. We would probably move. But not to Bethesda or Arlington because I have no desire to pay for a mortgage on a house that costs that much. Therefore we'd have a ton of disposable income compared to you. Maybe we'd take a few real vacations. And save a lot.

See I don't want the same things as you. I don't expect to be "rich". Life is surely about more than that. The fact that you are so caught up in dust you don't have is just sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still do not understand the almost aggressive way DCUMers making $300K want to be called middle class. Why are you not proud of having achieved more than 95% of other people?

That's like telling people your kid with 4.5 GPA is an average student. It doesn't make you seem humble, it makes you seem hopelessly greedy. "I have soooooo much, but I want MORE."

I don't really get it either. I also don't get why they all sound so dissatisfied with life.

It's really self explanatory. Imagine what it would be like to have $200k/$300k income. Okay, got that mental image ready? Nice eh?

Those of us who have made it can tell you with certainty, it's not like that. You don't go from driving an Accord to driving a Ferrari. More like from an Accord to a TLX. That's why you don't get it, because we didn't get it either. Making $200k to $300k isn't what it's cracked up to be. The dream is a lie. When you wake up to reality and the outcome doesn't match expectation, well, that's a definition of dissatisfaction, isn't it?

The fact is if my salary increased that much I still wouldn't want a Ferrari because I know material things don't make you happy. We would probably move. But not to Bethesda or Arlington because I have no desire to pay for a mortgage on a house that costs that much. Therefore we'd have a ton of disposable income compared to you. Maybe we'd take a few real vacations. And save a lot.

See I don't want the same things as you. I don't expect to be "rich". Life is surely about more than that. The fact that you are so caught up in dust you don't have is just sad.

Should read "what" not "dust"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:300k three kids. Living month to month.

Then you have made poor choices.

I get that these higher incomes don't feel like that much to many in the 200-300 bracket but it is a lot. My family lived on a income of about $100k for 7 yrs when I was a SAHM and Now we make about $240k between my going back to work and DH's raises. Sure, taxes and childcare take some but we are substantially better off at this higher income -- we were able to do a significant renovation of our house, increased retirement savings, setting aside college savings, travel a bit more, and overall just not have to think as much about money day to day. Much of our extended family is truly middle class, living in modest homes in smaller cities with less ability to save for emergencies, retirement, and college, and have those little daily luxuries without thinkIng about it.

because our tax system is progressive the more you make the higher the percentage of taxes that come out. You don't really reap the rewards of a higher income until about 500k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still do not understand the almost aggressive way DCUMers making $300K want to be called middle class. Why are you not proud of having achieved more than 95% of other people?

That's like telling people your kid with 4.5 GPA is an average student. It doesn't make you seem humble, it makes you seem hopelessly greedy. "I have soooooo much, but I want MORE."

I don't really get it either. I also don't get why they all sound so dissatisfied with life.

It's really self explanatory. Imagine what it would be like to have $200k/$300k income. Okay, got that mental image ready? Nice eh?

Those of us who have made it can tell you with certainty, it's not like that. You don't go from driving an Accord to driving a Ferrari. More like from an Accord to a TLX. That's why you don't get it, because we didn't get it either. Making $200k to $300k isn't what it's cracked up to be. The dream is a lie. When you wake up to reality and the outcome doesn't match expectation, well, that's a definition of dissatisfaction, isn't it?

The fact is if my salary increased that much I still wouldn't want a Ferrari because I know material things don't make you happy. We would probably move. But not to Bethesda or Arlington because I have no desire to pay for a mortgage on a house that costs that much. Therefore we'd have a ton of disposable income compared to you. Maybe we'd take a few real vacations. And save a lot.

See I don't want the same things as you. I don't expect to be "rich". Life is surely about more than that. The fact that you are so caught up in dust you don't have is just sad.

only an idiot thinks people who make 300k s year buy Ferraris