Go, Economy!

[Yoshi]

Rich for most people is enough cash to get a nice car/house and be able to do basically what you want w/o worry and not worry about immediate financial repercussions. Basically, go to Disney or 6 Flags on a whim in your F150 Platinum or GT500 and NOT miss your bills. Or rich enough to have all that and still be able to be an active investor.

Arguing over the definition of what's rich is dumb because every one basically knows the difference between impoverished/poor/midclass/rich/ultra rich/warren buffet. You can make 100k/year and not be "technically rich" but you're not hurting unless you're really stupid with your money, even if you live in San Fran or NYC.

I want a number. Even your definition is completely open to everyone's interpretation of "basically whatever you want."

This thread proves that not everyone knows the difference over and over again. Hell, you just proved it.

[Andrew]

Andrew: I don't blame this on the "Obama economy" since the economy was taking a shit before he took office, but yeah. I started a new job almost 3 years ago that made significantly more money than my last. My finances were already pretty lean due to having a shitty job, and I kept it that way so that soon I didn't even know when payday was since I had a pretty significant amount of reserve cash in the bank.

Go to a few months ago, I make approximately 4% more than I did when I was first hired, and I live worse than I did at my previous retail job making next to nothing. I live in the same house, paying the same rent, but everything is so much more expensive now that I was barely breaking even on income/expenses. Fast forward to today, with the baby, and I'm a little in the red every month now.

Man, I can't even imagine bringing a baby into the equation. I mean, I'm sure it's worth it in the end because it's your kid and all (talking like I can relate). But yeah. That's rough.

I was with you until you said "Obama economy". Kill yourself

So at what point is it reasonable for the president to assume responsibility for the state of the economy? Four years in? Six? Only when it gets better? I've been pretty lenient because our current president didn't exactly walk into a rosy scenario. But when he's asking for four more years, it's only fair to grade the work that has been done so far.

Our taxes are at like a 30 year low. Coroporate taxes are at a 40 year low. I think we can write off trickle down economics as a failure already.

OH WAIT I FORGOT OBUMMER IS A SOCIALIST CUT TAXES MOAR

I'm in a higher tax bracket than I was four years ago, but that's not what I was talking about. Lots of other taxes have gone up, having a detrimental effect on my buying power. Take tobacco, for example. In early 2009, a pack of Marlboro Lights went for about $3.00. Today, they're $5.50. Most of that price increase is due to the fact that tobacco taxes have gone through the roof over the past few years.

But again, I wasn't talking about taxes, I was talking about the cost of living. Utilities, commodities, gasoline, the tanking of the dollar--for someone who engages in a good amount of commerce outside the US, this is a particularly nasty kick to the nuts. My point is that I'm doing reasonably well by most standards. I've been promoted and received pay raises. And yet, I'm much worse off than I was four years ago because everything is so much more fucking expensive. When I think about our nation's unemployed and underemployed trying to get by in the same climate, it's just depressing.

I never said that it was about taxes or that it was directly because of things Obama did or did not do--that was you. But like it or not, he has been the president for nearly four years. It's his economy. You don't like it? That's too bad.

[Yoshi]

Take tobacco, for example. In early 2009, a pack of Marlboro Lights went for about $3.00. Today, they're $5.50. Most of that price increase is due to the fact that tobacco taxes have gone through the roof over the past few years.

It's still not high enough. That's the kind of shit that should be taxed to hell and back, especially if we have to subsidize the healthcare of the people too stupid/weak to quit. That's a huge sore spot for me because this God damned state is scared to death to tax tobacco because of the lobbyists. So they tax stuff everyone has to use, like gasoline, way higher instead.

[Diff-chan]

$100,000 is a lot of money in every square inch of the country, but it's not "rich" necessarily. Remember, rich generally refers to net worth not income.

I'd say that if you are a rentier, you are rich. That practically goes without saying. For the most part, the people making 100k are also working for a paycheck, and people working for a paycheck have more in common with the janitor at their office than Mitt Romney (no matter how large the paycheck).

If you are working for a paycheck but are worth more than, I don't know, the 90th or 95th percentile, you're rich. I think the 90th percentile in this country is around $1.5 million of net worth.

[Yoshi]

That makes a ton of sense.

[Hero]

100k is not rich in very many if any places in the US.

I can say with utmost certainty that it's paltry for CA compared to how far it can go elsewhere, and many many many folks are under that line. Yet still state and local governments look for new ways to make it more expensive to live here.

The biggest rub is that I really love where I live. I just wish elected officials felt the same and were concerned about growing the state's economy through bidding for jobs. Right now, we get ads for neighbor states like AZ, WA, and OR saying "look - lower taxes! Less crime! Jobs are moving here" and it'd only be more tempting if I could actually afford to relocate.

[Andrew]

In Guam, $100K is very much middle class. Same for Alaska and Hawaii.

[Diff-chan]

I can say with utmost certainty that it's paltry for CA compared to how far it can go elsewhere, and many many many folks are under that line. Yet still state and local governments look for new ways to make it more expensive to live here.

Obviously the money doesn't go as far in expensive areas as less expensive ones. But it's still a lot of money. There is no place in the country where it isn't. Even a place like Atherton has a median individual income under $100,000.

[Yoshi]

That reminds me of a question I was going to ask. When we see median incomes reported, what is the population? Does that include anyone filing taxes, i.e. even part time high school kids? Does it include everyone counted in the census, i.e. infants?

[Frogacuda]

This may be the best analysis I have ever read. Well done. And that was the point I was trying to make. People see percentiles and make assumptions about what that means. I frankly would have guessed that the individual numbers would have been higher for 90%. My question remains how do you go after the 1% or 0.1% in a way that doesn't take the 90-99% or even lower in collateral damage? My contention is still that the most effective way is to close loop holes, with the most obvious examples being the offshore accounts that keep getting mentioned.

This is a much further reaching, institutional problem then you seem to be appreciating. It's the result of the influence of money in our political system for decades and decades.

The issue isn't just the rich not paying their taxes, it's the rich making the rules (both in the form of regulation and deregulation).

Even the stock market is fucked, because the people making money on it do so by taking advantage of volatility. A stable market isn't good for them, because they make their money by flipping stocks in a fast-paced environment, which basically means skimming money out of the economy and creating and popping these bubbles that cost other people their fortunes. . That's what a lot of these people are doing in one way or another. The same for wheeling and dealing in derivatives.

We need to make it harder for people to make money "the wrong way" (broadly speaking, making money by having money), rather than the "right way" (by creating value). If people are doing the latter, the whole economy grows. How we do that is a pretty huge discussion, and it's not the kind of thing we're going to fix right away.