HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » $400,000 per year = $33,3...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:19 AM

$400,000 per year = $33,333 per month


$250,000 per year = $20,833 per month.


I wish they would say the monthly income so people would have a better perspective during these tax talks regarding the "fiscal cliff".


--

95 replies, 8357 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 95 replies Author Time Post
Reply $400,000 per year = $33,333 per month (Original post)
SHRED Dec 2012 OP
loyalkydem Dec 2012 #1
Voice for Peace Dec 2012 #17
Victor_c3 Dec 2012 #32
SheilaT Dec 2012 #37
Victor_c3 Dec 2012 #47
Spitfire of ATJ Dec 2012 #53
Voice for Peace Dec 2012 #61
ROBROX Dec 2012 #58
RedCappedBandit Dec 2012 #67
bluestate10 Dec 2012 #72
In_The_Wind Dec 2012 #38
RoccoR5955 Dec 2012 #41
In_The_Wind Dec 2012 #45
Victor_c3 Dec 2012 #68
RoccoR5955 Dec 2012 #69
Victor_c3 Jan 2013 #84
Martin Eden Dec 2012 #60
Skittles Jan 2013 #81
crazyjoe Jan 2013 #92
billbailey19448jj Jan 2013 #95
LAGC Dec 2012 #2
julian09 Dec 2012 #8
LAGC Dec 2012 #11
russspeakeasy Dec 2012 #24
Kennah Jan 2013 #83
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #13
crazyjoe Dec 2012 #3
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #4
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #7
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #16
duffyduff Dec 2012 #23
crazyjoe Dec 2012 #64
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #65
Morganfleeman Dec 2012 #66
geckosfeet Dec 2012 #71
crazyjoe Jan 2013 #91
geckosfeet Jan 2013 #93
Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #77
Lurker Deluxe Jan 2013 #94
CJCRANE Dec 2012 #18
Coyotl Dec 2012 #5
goclark Dec 2012 #6
julian09 Dec 2012 #10
CrispyQ Dec 2012 #21
BuelahWitch Dec 2012 #43
coalition_unwilling Dec 2012 #9
Doctor_J Dec 2012 #20
kentuck Dec 2012 #12
JaneyVee Dec 2012 #14
The Wielding Truth Dec 2012 #46
Romulox Dec 2012 #15
flamingdem Dec 2012 #19
Coyotl Dec 2012 #22
SHRED Dec 2012 #25
Purveyor Dec 2012 #29
SHRED Dec 2012 #34
SHRED Dec 2012 #35
Purveyor Dec 2012 #40
SHRED Dec 2012 #42
kentuck Dec 2012 #26
ewagner Dec 2012 #27
SmileyRose Jan 2013 #80
liberal N proud Dec 2012 #28
KitSileya Jan 2013 #85
Skidmore Dec 2012 #30
Orrex Dec 2012 #44
A Simple Game Dec 2012 #59
TexasBushwhacker Dec 2012 #63
Ed Suspicious Jan 2013 #78
JI7 Jan 2013 #86
dotymed Dec 2012 #31
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #57
Curmudgeoness Dec 2012 #33
SheilaT Dec 2012 #39
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #50
Curmudgeoness Dec 2012 #54
Earth_First Dec 2012 #36
Mass Dec 2012 #48
JDPriestly Dec 2012 #49
joanbarnes Dec 2012 #51
MADem Dec 2012 #52
DallasNE Dec 2012 #55
srican69 Dec 2012 #62
TexasBushwhacker Dec 2012 #70
high density Dec 2012 #74
TexasBushwhacker Jan 2013 #75
Exultant Democracy Dec 2012 #56
high density Dec 2012 #73
appleannie1 Jan 2013 #76
Warpy Jan 2013 #79
AZ Progressive Jan 2013 #82
bowens43 Jan 2013 #87
DeSwiss Jan 2013 #88
goclark Jan 2013 #89
DeSwiss Jan 2013 #90

Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:24 AM

1. You and me both

Life would be sweet even on 20,833 a month.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Reply #1)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:23 AM

17. I could live in luxury for 2500 a month.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:26 PM

32. Where do you live where $2,500 a month is luxury?

I make just short of that every two weeks and I'm brokedy broke broke living about an hour north of NYC - and I get a once monthly check from the VA for about $1,500 for my disability.

Just curious, not looking for an argument.

I rent a house, drive two cars that are nearly 10 years old, and I have two kids. My wife doesn't work, but she is a full-time stay-at-home mom. I feel like I'm just scraping by here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:36 PM

37. It depends on your personal definition of luxury.

I can live very well on $2,500 a month take-home. I do live alone, I bought a small home three years ago and the payments are affordable. My 2004 Honda Civic is paid off. I almost never buy books but I make great and constant use of the local library. I like to cook and don't eat out very often. I have good friends and we get together just to chat or play card games.

I would love to have more money and do a lot of travelling, but since I did travel a fair amount in my youth, this is okay for now.

Like you, I'm not looking for an argument, but Luxury can be in the way you choose to look at things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SheilaT (Reply #37)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:00 PM

47. true and very good point

I guess it all comes down to what is important to you in life.

I used to have a job working as a production manager for a large online book retailer (I'm not allowed to say anything bad about them because they threatened to sue me if I did) where I was making boatloads of cash. That job was hell, but I had no problems paying my bills and everything material-wise that I wanted was well within my reach. Actually, the stress from the job ruined my life and did a toll on me. I had some PTSD issues from my time in Iraq and stress was causing me to spiral out of control and really exasperating my PTSD. I'd show up to work feeling like I was drunk (even though I didn't drink), all disorientated and seeing things, throwing up, and freaking out on everyone. I actually was suspended for 5-6 weeks, returned to work, then lost my job about 3 months later (I even was on vacation for one of those three months). When I lost my job it was like a switched flipped in my head and my issues melted away. I was unemployed for four months in 2009-2010 and I eventually got a job working for the federal government as a chemist. I took a pay cut, but now I'm not in charge of anyone and I just poke around a lab all day keeping myself busy. I look forward to going to work everyday and my quality of life has improved drastically.

So, yup. You're right. It is all about how you look at things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #47)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:11 PM

53. Damn,...I was hoping you would get angry so you would be a Mad Scientist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #47)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:30 PM

61. I think the above poster answered the question you posed

I live in NM, and cost of living is generally cheaper
here than other places I've lived -- but it's more about
being able to afford the essentials + a little more = luxury.
Good quality cat food & medical care, really healthy people
food, cozy & warm living space.. the basics + quality. Most
important, the part that's free.. life, each day, breath
coming in and out, sun & sky, hopeful heart.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:24 PM

58. Grossing $5K per month

 

Supporting my 6 children and grandchildren; we just scrap by every month. If it was just the wife and I we would be so well off. We gross more per month then 4 of my children who have had their jobs over 10 years.

It is sad that the GOP and others have suppressed wages. This year the minimum wage should be $10 per hour and NO person should earn more than the president or $500K. The extra cash should be GIVEN to workers who are more deserving.

I also think al debts public and private should be CANCELED.........

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:05 PM

67. I love on the north shore of LI

and would be very happy to make that much money.

edit: Granted, I am single and have no children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #32)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 09:59 PM

72. $2,500 per month would get a small apartment in Boston.

In Arkansas, it would be a dream amount of money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:38 PM

38. Not in my neighborhood.

100 miles north of NYC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to In_The_Wind (Reply #38)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:49 PM

41. You must be in a different neighborhood than I do.

Because here you can live well for 2500/month.
You probably live in Dutchess County. Move to Ulster, and see how much less it costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #41)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:56 PM

45. Howdy neighbor.

I agree with you about Dutchess County costing more.
However even in Ulster County, two can not live as cheaply as one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #41)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 07:48 PM

68. I live in Beacon

Right across the river from Newburgh and I commute to work at West Point. I'd love to live a little further north in New Paltz, but the town is a little too much of a college town for me. Though it is a pretty area. Beacon to West Point is about a 30 minute commute for me. New Paltz and that area is just a little too far for me.

The Hudson Valley is a great place to live and raise a family. I'm glad I made the move to this area

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Victor_c3 (Reply #68)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 08:27 PM

69. I know what you mean.

And let me tell you. New Paltz is one of the most expensive places to live in Ulster. So is Woodstock.
I live in Rosendale. I like to call it, "the poor man's Woodstock."

I know that being that you work at West Point, you must be Army, but if you would like to sail, show up at the Beacon Sloop Club on the first Friday night at around 6 or so, and get involved with a lot of good people on the Hudson River. They have a pot luck dinner, (so bring a dish to share, your own plate, and utensils) followed by a meeting, ending up with an old time Hootenanny. The musicians there are quite good, and some are quite famous.
They also do a number of festivals in the park, by the riverfront. They also own the sloop Woodie Guthrie, a 1/3 size gaff-rigged sloop, modeled after the Sloop Clearwater.
And don't worry about kids, the place is quite kid friendly, and prides itself as such.
During the warmer months, they have work parties, and sail the Woodie every week night. The winter months are dedicated to performing necessary maintenance to the boat, as well as other boats that the club owns.
I had a lot of fun there when I lived closer, but these days, I don't get out of work until late.
And finally, don't worry about the cost. It's a "pay what you can" kind of membership.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #69)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 06:12 AM

84. Thanks for the heads up

I actually work for the Department of Treasury. I'm one of the chemist at the US Mint facility there. Unless you are a coin collector, not a lot of people even know that there is a mint facility at West Point.

The general kid-friendly attitude of Beacon was another of the major points drawing us to Beacon. I've been here just about three years now and I completely love it. As far as the festivals go, I love all the stuff they do at the riverfront. It is so cool to go to one of these events and then to see Pete Seeger just bumbling around with his banjo (or whatever instrument he has that day) on his back. Pete Seeger has done so much for the Hudson River, music, and conservation.

As my kids get a little older and it becomes easier for me to take them out with me, I'll have to check out the boat. I've been threatening to do that for a while now.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #17)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:38 PM

60. My salary is exactly twice that, but slightly less than 1/4 of $250k

I can afford to pay more taxes, and would not oppose lowering the $250k threshold to include my bracket.

My wife and I live in DuPage County Illinois (middle class suburbs west of Chicago). Cost of living & propery taxes here are not cheap, but certainly less than NYC. We're better off than most at our income because we owe nothing on our house or cars and our daughter is finished with college ... but a family living here with a mortgage & car payments & one or more kids in college would have to live frugally to get by on our combined income (together, just under 6 figures).

I feel very fortunate that we can travel on vacations (including my senior softball tournaments out of state) and can afford to buy high quality backpacking gear to indulge my other recreational pursuit. My wife is a wizard with coupons and manages our finances very well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Martin Eden (Reply #60)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:01 AM

81. how about ponying up some bucks for DU?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Voice for Peace (Reply #17)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:21 PM

92. $30,000 a year?? you can make more than that at McDonalds !!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to loyalkydem (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:57 PM

95. Count me in as well

 

Hell, even $10000/month would be sufficient in my case, since I'm a very frugal individual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:26 AM

2. Yeah, but don't you understand? These people are STRUGGLING!

I mean, you got a $10K/month house payment, $3K on all your multiple cars/SUVs, all the hired help (maids and groundskeepers) to pay, "personal expenses", I mean, sheesh.

Where's the money to pay all those extra 3% in taxes?!?!?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #2)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:58 AM

8. The tax is on the net income not gross income.

 

You can deduct mortgage interest, wages to hired help, property taxes, charitable contributions, personal and child deductions etc.
Then if your net income is above still $250,000, you pay the 4.6% increase on the portion over $250,000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:04 AM

11. I know, I was being facetious.

I didn't think I really needed to use the sarcasm tag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #11)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:03 PM

24. You didn't, but around here, it's safer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAGC (Reply #11)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:41 AM

83. You forgot to mention the upkeep on a car elevator

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #8)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:12 AM

13. Yeah, and it's a MARGINAL tax rate

if you make $250,001, you only pay the high rate on $1.00. These media whores make so much money it actually DOES affect them. That's why they don't give the details.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:30 AM

3. I thought the point was to raise taxes on millionairs?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazyjoe (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:45 AM

4. $250k over four years is $1m.

I don't care if you save it all or spend it all. If you piss $1m through your hands in four years that's your problem.

Most people don't see $1m in a lifetime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:58 AM

7. I'm politically on your side, but want to point out a math issue. The national

 

median income is $50K/year. If we assume a working life of 40 years (25-65) x $50K/year, we're looking at $2 million in a lifetime of working.

Still, your general point is quite valid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to coalition_unwilling (Reply #7)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:18 AM

16. Yes. I didn't bother to do the multiplication.

If $50k can be truly considered the median.



Most people don't start off working $50k a year jobs. They probably toil most of their working lives at far less than that.

Anyway - lots of variables. Point being it is saner to call someone making $250k+ a year a millionaire - than calling someone making $50k a year a millionaire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #16)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:02 PM

23. "Median household income" doesn't mean anything in an era of two-income households

Very, very few jobs these days even pay 50k a year. Certainly not the new jobs being created. The second income of most households distorts everything. It camouflages how bad a shape this country is in economically.

Try making it in this country being a single person and then having your career taken away illegally and being over 50. Then you will appreciate just how bad it is out here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #4)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 05:09 PM

64. what the F are you talking about? who said anything about pissing through 250k a year?

 

I thought the goal was to raise taxes on the wealthy, 250k a year in household income is not wealthy.
btw, plenty of people see 1M in there lifetime, $25,000 over 40 years is $1,000,000.
So i guess you won't ever see 1M, but most will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazyjoe (Reply #64)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:22 PM

65. Well you see. $250k a year is wealthy. That's wtf I am talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #65)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 06:58 PM

66. Farcical

Wealthy? I earn just slightly above that and live in a high cost area of the country. I wish I was wealthy. Do I do well? Yes, but I'm certainly not wealthy especially after paying federal, state, city, and property taxes. You clearly don't know what wealthy means.

That said, I don't mind my taxes going up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Morganfleeman (Reply #66)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 09:50 PM

71. I find it hard to drum up sympathy for you. Cry on someone elses shoulder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #71)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 02:19 PM

91. I don't think Morgan asked for, or wants your sympathy.

 

He's just saying $250,000 a year is not wealthy, and I agree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazyjoe (Reply #91)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:41 PM

93. Well that makes two of you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Morganfleeman (Reply #66)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:26 AM

77. Maybe you could rent to get away from those property taxes. I have a nice two bedroom with washer

and dryer for $650 in Wisconsin (heat included). Save yourself a pant's load of money. You could live like a king in my neighborhood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ed Suspicious (Reply #77)

Fri Jan 4, 2013, 04:49 PM

94. Heh

You think renting gets you away from property taxes?

What, you think the owner of that property just eats those costs and doesn't pass them on to the renter?

If you live in a high tax area, your rent will not be $650 ... for any size anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to crazyjoe (Reply #3)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:37 AM

18. Well, the top 2% includes millionaires

so you can breathe a sigh of relief.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:53 AM

5. It is NOT easy being a job creator, juggling the maid, gardener, pool boy, manicurist, driver, and

all the accountants

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to goclark (Reply #6)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:01 AM

10. That is for working 120 days a year out of 365.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to julian09 (Reply #10)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:47 AM

21. And they don't even work much on those 120 days!

CNN reported this morning that the 112th Congress is one of the most unproductive since the 1940s. Their approval rating is at 18%. Boehner makes $234,000 a year*. In salary. That doesn't include any perks, like insider info for market trades. Didn't Bill Frist have a stock trader living at his house?

The whole system is so corrupt & compromised.


* They also reported that Biden makes $231,000 & Reid makes $194,000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #21)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:51 PM

43. Hey, all those appearances on Press the Meat and Faux News count as work too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:59 AM

9. Keeping those car elevators running requires some real Dough-re-mi! - n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Coyotl (Reply #5)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:40 AM

20. car elevator repair man, neighborhood gate guard, 35 lawyers

...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:08 AM

12. typical middle class family

$33,000 per month.

Depending on where you live, of course...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:13 AM

14. Only 1.2Million people in America make that much or higher.

Roughly 700,000 people make $400k a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #14)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:56 PM

46. It's amazing how few people control the conversation. They are a true minority of privilege.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:13 AM

15. But if you live (in a mansion!) on the Coasts, that money doesn't go too far...

Or something like that...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:39 AM

19. Steve Israel just on MSNBC smirking about 450 grand a year not being much money

in urban areas.

As they fuck over the middle class....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 11:54 AM

22. $400,000 is a complete retirement if you are one of the lucky few!

Meanwhile, any talk about those living on a $600 social security check and no annuities? (Rhetorical question, of course!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:07 PM

25. = $1,111 per day

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #25)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:17 PM

29. $1532 a day for a 5 day work week. eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:30 PM

34. goodpoint

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #29)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:34 PM

35. wait a minute


$33,333 per month divided by 20 days (5 day week) is $1666 isn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Reply #35)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:47 PM

40. I used the 104 'weekend days' for the calendar year. The varying calendar days per month skews

the number...I guess.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Purveyor (Reply #40)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:49 PM

42. thanks got it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:07 PM

26. Unfortunate truth.

This is who both Parties represent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #26)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:14 PM

27. true

it's the stark, ugly truth Kentuck

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kentuck (Reply #26)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:46 AM

80. +1

sadly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:15 PM

28. Its HARD when you only make $400,000 year.

More in a month than some make in a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal N proud (Reply #28)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 06:50 AM

85. More in a month than *most* make in a year.

Let's be clear, 1.93% of all US households earned over $250,000 in 2006, and I doubt it's gotten any better since then - I'm sure the median of that year, $50,533 is higher than today's.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:18 PM

30. I keep hearing how people in NYC and other metropolitan areas need that kind of income

and that isn't much for them. I find it hard to believe that salaries are that high for the "average" office worker or laborer in those areas. Who makes salaries like this? White collar/professional workers? Mid level management? Just who? Out here in the hinterlands, $50K is seen as good money and $100K is wealthy. You can buy a good house for $100K.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #30)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:53 PM

44. You're completely correct, and anyone who makes that claim is full of malarkey

I've had that argument quite a few times here on DU, even in recent months. In every case the noble defender of the $250K paupers claims that baseline cost of living demands that level of income, and after taxes and 401k contributions and insurance premiums and so forth they're left with a mere $1600 of loose cash each month.

How do these poor souls get by?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #44)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:34 PM

59. How do they get by? I know it would require some serious belt tightening, but

for one they could switch from two $5.00 Lattes per work day to two $4.00 Lattes per day. That would save them about $500 per year.

I'm sure we on DU could come up with several ways to help these poor souls survive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Simple Game (Reply #59)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:03 PM

63. You mean you don't HAVE to live on the Upper West Side?

You don't have to send your kids to private school? You don't have to drive a car with under 50K miles? You don't have to spend $2K a month eating out and another $2K on clothes? I realize that if you live in Manhattan you have state AND local income tax, and if you make $400K and pay 50% of your income in tax that would suck BUT you still have $4K A WEEK to live on. Can you find a nice place to live in Manhattan for $5K a month? According to Zillow you can. Considering that the median household income is around $50k before taxes I just don't see how someone making 8 times that can say that a tax hike of 5% is unaffordable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Orrex (Reply #44)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:29 AM

78. lmao!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Skidmore (Reply #30)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 06:59 AM

86. it's BS. the people who are struggling on that much are ones who live beyond their means

by buying all these luxury items. maybe spending tens of thousands to send kids to private school rather than the very good public school. buying designer crap. buying very expensive cars for each member of the family including under 16 year old who just got driver's license.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:26 PM

31. To me it is amazing that

most people (including DU'ers) think that returning to the tax rates of the 1950's is way too much.
You know, the times when a CEO made approximately 40x what his/her highest paid worker earned. A time when (not racially) people of all incomes were much more equal.
I am definitely not nostalgic for that period in time. I am nostalgic for a tax system that was actually progressive. Cut out the loopholes and lets get rid of this terrible income disparity. Greed is destroying the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dotymed (Reply #31)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:21 PM

57. I'm with you, dotymed.

My husband and I were talking about one of our children who has a job that entails a lot of responsibility and earns pretty good money. She chose her profession at a very early age, never wavered from her determination to get the education necessary to do it and is utterly devoted to her work.

She lives very simply and is extremely generous. But her most striking trait is her devotion to her work and the people for whom she is responsible. Of course, I'm personally proud of her.

But the thing that struck us is that she, like many other people who are really, really good at what they do, is not in it for the money although she is paid well. She is in it because she cares and really wants to help make the world better.

I do not agree with those who think that you have to pay people large sums of money in order to motivate them or give them incentives. I don't think that anyone will turn down a generous salary of paycheck, but I really don't think that is what motivates excellence in the workplace or business.

Some people will tell you they work for the money, but then you look at what they do and how they live, and you realize they are really working to win the game of working. They are investing to win the game of investing. Or alternatively, they are really working or investing because they love what they do whether they will admit it or not.

So, I think that raising the tax rates really won't be a disincentive at all. People for whom earning a lot of money is a reward because it means that they have won the game will be really angry at first, but they will still get their joy from winning and will soon overcome their anger.

For them, making money is like playing a sport. That is something that many of us wage- and salary-earners don't understand. They will keep playing the sport as long as they can regardless of the prize at the end. Well, I qualify that. When I was working, I sometimes decided at the end of one year what changes I wanted to make in my work and set a number goal about how much I wanted to be earning at the end of the year. I made that goal a surprising number of times (although it was always a modest goal). I found the game of it to be fun. It helped me over those rough days when you really don't want to get up and go to work.

We have nothing to fear from raising the taxes of the rich. They have already invested most of their money overseas. Let's make our part of the world a good, healthy, thriving place with what they owe on the rest. Raising taxes is necessary to do that. If the economy gets better, we can lower them again. In fact that is what we should tell the rich.

You help us get the economy going again, get the employment rate up, get education less expensive and the housing market back on an even keel and you can have your lower tax rates back. But until our economy regains its health, we are putting you on a high-tax, lower take-home diet. Thank you very much.

Now that is the kind of compromise that we should be talking about -- working together to make the country better, not taking from a relatively poor group in exchange for lower taxes for the rich.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:27 PM

33. Or that is over $192 per hour if you work a 40 hour week.

People often look at hourly wages, especially the working class.

I cannot say how many hours a week these over $400,000 people work, and I am sure that it ranges from few to astronomical hours. But I know that the people I have worked for who are in the high earnings usually 1) show up much later than the workers, 2) talk about all the late hours they work---even if they did start halfway through the day, 3) do the haircut, spa, workouts, etc during the work day, and 4) call golf games and three hour lunches "working".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:42 PM

39. Very good point, the hourly wage.

Every so often I'll ask someone how much they make, but not to tell me the number that comes to mind, as it really isn't my business. And then I'll ask them if the number they thought if is their yearly, monthly, bi-weekly paycheck, or hourly wage. It's simply an interesting way to see how people think of their income.

Me, I can tell you my hourly wage, but I also know what my paycheck is if I have no overtime. Since Thanksgiving I've been working overtime every week, so I've gotten a series of much larger than usual paychecks, which is nice. I actually have to look at my pay stub to see what I make on the yearly basis, because that number isn't very meaningful to me, since I get a paycheck every other week.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Curmudgeoness (Reply #33)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:06 PM

50. Yes. Usually mixing with clients or suppliers is a big part of the "work" of those earning

$400,000. Those kinds of salaries belong to people who don't have to go through much of a work review or evaluation. They are usually the people reviewing or evaluating others.

If they applied the standard to themselves that they apply to their underlings at evaluation time, the American economy would be roaring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #50)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:14 PM

54. LOL, that reminds me of a review I had once

when I worked at an accounting firm, and I was called on the carpet over my billable hours being too low. I just looked right at the partner reviewing me and told him that problem belonged in his evaluation....it was his responsibility to keep me in work, and if he didn't bring enough work in for us, that did not fall on me.

I don't work there anymore. (But I didn't get fired, I just got lectured.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 12:36 PM

36. Or approximately $32,233 more than the average social security recipient... n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:02 PM

48. And also give the median income. Because even $250,000 is very high compared to the median income.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:02 PM

49. Yes.

$10,000 per month is much more than enough money in most parts of the country.

If you are making more than that, you usually can afford to tighten your belt quite a bit.

The exceptions are people who have a disabled family member or someone with a chronic medical condition that insurance does not cover and people with very large student loans or a large family.

Also, people who are taking the income of their business as personal income and putting it back into the business may appear to have higher incomes than they really do. They can remedy that if they want to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:07 PM

51. You're right. More than a lot of folks make in a year.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:09 PM

52. I'd be jumping with joy if I made half that! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:16 PM

55. Tom Brokaw On MTP Yesterday Said

That $250,000 a year is not that much money because those people are struggling too as though they are only one step removed from the soup kitchen. What does it say when people in the message business are that far removed from reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #55)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 02:52 PM

62. Tom Brokaw is an ass...he is dying to stand up on top of a building and scream his lungs out that

Democrats are a bunch of communists Bennett upon staking his hard earned money...and that they should bleep themselves..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #55)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 09:45 PM

70. You can "struggle" on any income if you choose to live beyond your means

It also depends on where you live. $250K goes a lot farther in Houston than it does in Manhattan. But struggling? I am disabled and living on one third what I grossed in my best year, 2003. If you told me I could live on this in 2003 I would have laughed in your face. You can't control the cards you're dealt, just how you play your hand. But as difficult as my situation is, it's better than my roommate's, so I am grateful. I got a roof over my head (for now) and food in my belly. Everything else is gravy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DallasNE (Reply #55)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:10 PM

74. The tax increase was going to be something like $1500 for a couple making $350k a year

If another $125/mo of taxes on $30k/mo of income is putting somebody in the poor house then I guess it's time to stop buying a new Porsche 911 every year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to high density (Reply #74)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:14 AM

75. Well, it's more than that

The end of the payroll tax holiday means they will pay an additional 2% on the first $110K. If they have one earner that's $2200, but if you have a husband that makes $150K and a wife that makes $200K, then it will be $4400.

Someone who has $350K of taxable income will be in the 36% bracket rather than the 33%. Assuming that the top $140K is taxed at 36%, they'll pay an extra $4200. Of course someone making $350K before taxes still has more in their wallet at the end of the day than the average family that's making $50K before taxes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 01:18 PM

56. A lot of doctors and other professionals who actually work make that much. Go after capital gains

I think people who work ( and go to school forever and take on enormous debt) should be spared until we go after the trust fund babies and wall street gangsters first.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Exultant Democracy (Reply #56)

Mon Dec 31, 2012, 10:07 PM

73. I agree, the ridiculously cheap capital gains tax is the biggest headscratcher

It is rewarding disruptive non-work financial shenanigans and effectively punishing those who actually work and have earned income. The low capital gains/dividend tax is not incentivizing what we want it to which is real capital investment in businesses, and it is instead primarily funding speculation and disruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 12:16 AM

76. That is what we live on for a year.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 01:34 AM

79. Yes, and they'll all shriek poverty on that

It's high time we stopped listening to such protestations of poverty from fat cats and reinstitute a real progressive tax structure.

Democracy cannot coexist with plutocracy. We have to choose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 02:07 AM

82. I've looked at the median household incomes (NOT personal incomes) of wealthy areas

via zip code maps and $150,000 a year in household income (after deductions of course) is enough to get you in many wealthy areas in California including Beverly Hills.

http://www.richblockspoorblocks.com/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 07:30 AM

87. again the majority of wealthy made out like bandits at the expense of the poor and middle class.

250,000 - 400,000 got a sweet deal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SHRED (Original post)

Tue Jan 1, 2013, 07:56 AM

88. Or put even more clearly:

$400,000 per year = $7692.31 per week , or $1095.89 per day
-- or --
$250,000 per year = $4807.69 per week, $684.93 per day


But of course, if they referred to it that way then people could more easily figure out just how tremendously they're screwin' their pooches. Might make some folks a little angrier than they already are.

- And we can't have that, now can we?

K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeSwiss (Reply #88)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 06:21 PM

89. Aren't the American People

Last edited Wed Jan 2, 2013, 08:42 PM - Edit history (1)

their " boss?"

DON'T WE HAVE A SAY IN HOW MUCH THEY GET!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to goclark (Reply #89)

Wed Jan 2, 2013, 07:19 PM

90. In theory.....







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread