Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have noticed many people are very quick to label others who truly don't have that much of wealth as part of Upper class that control America. Honestly, there is a big difference between someone with $1 million network and a super rich person with $1 billion. A lot of people would even say making $200K makes people rich!
Instead, I would say someone making $1 million a year is living a lifestyle closer to middle class Americans than the truly wealthy/super rich. I would argue people making $250K to $1 million a year are Upper middle class. Making $1 mil to $10 mil, might make them part of bottom ranks of Upper class but they definitely will not get power/lifestyle the super rich has.
Another point I would like make is surprisingly the federal income tax bracket tops out around $400K. It basically puts the upper middle class in same category as super rich with billions of dollars. In fact, most people talk about increase % of top bracket instead of adding a new super rich tax bracket (say $10 million).
The top percent of people may have a net worth of a billion dollars but they hardly make a billion dollars a year. Saying 10 million a year makes someone in the lower upper class is just absurd. The amount someone makes per year is generally less than there net worth if they are in the upper class. Net worth has little to do with actual cash on hand or money someone makes. it is also the worth of anything they have in their possession.
I would say your wealthy if your household income more than double your regional median household income. If you're single, then if your personal income is more than double the regional per capita income.
By "regional", I mean the metropolitan area's incomes.
Yeah, you can get more technical, but chances are that if you have those kinda incomes then your livin good and could live an extraordinary quality of life.
Interesting subject. Thank you for starting this thread.
Your numbers differ from my own idea of what wealthy is and isn't, but the question you ask is a really good one. It is perspective. To someone who has nothing, other peoples money can look bigger than it really is. I think that is why it is easy to convince the poorer masses that it is OK to increase tax on those making $250K a year.
I don't think there should be a different percentage for different income brackets. How can it be a fair share to pay a higher percentage of your income than someone else? Rather than argue about where you draw that line at rich and super rich I say it doesn't matter. It is their money. Should any person really have half of their income taken in taxes? What percentage is too much?
The uber-wealthy are really the top 10% of the 1%. Most single and double digit millionaires (net worth) live a frugal lifestyle (see: The Millionaire Next Door). More frugal than those spending other people's money for their subsistance, IMO. Thus the saying: "It is not what you have, it is what you do not spend."
At a certain level of wealth unless one completely p*sses it away, day to day spending ceases to be as much of a concern. Once one approaches the hundreds of million$ in net wealth, p*ssing away becomes less of a concern and gives a false sense of security. This could explain why so many Hollywood performers suddenly find themselves bankrupt as they thought they had enough to live the high life without a care in the world
The current tax code invites abuse and needs to be used to fuel the boilers in DC federal buildings. We need a new taxcode, one in which everyone participates (yes, even those receiving Medicaid) and one in which the deduction loopholes and shelters are all closed.
We cannot afford the great welfare society. That utopia does not exist and we should stop feeding that beast (for poor, rich, and corporations alike).
I would say your wealthy if your household income more than double your regional median household income. If you're single, then if your personal income is more than double the regional per capita income.
By "regional", I mean the metropolitan area's incomes.
Yeah, you can get more technical, but chances are that if you have those kinda incomes then your livin good and could live an extraordinary quality of life.
I think it really is misconception people are living such great quality of life just because the 2x median income or even people earning $1 million. For example, with these income you can't afford a private jet. With 2x median income even 1st class might be too much. You might be able to get more expensive car or house, but thats it.
Most like these people are still working full time, many over 40 hours a week. If there income stop, they will go bankrupt.
What do you think there really is extraordinary about their lifesytle?
The uber-wealthy are really the top 10% of the 1%. Most single and double digit millionaires (net worth) live a frugal lifestyle (see: The Millionaire Next Door). More frugal than those spending other people's money for their subsistance, IMO. Thus the saying: "It is not what you have, it is what you do not spend."
At a certain level of wealth unless one completely p*sses it away, day to day spending ceases to be as much of a concern. Once one approaches the hundreds of million$ in net wealth, p*ssing away becomes less of a concern and gives a false sense of security. This could explain why so many Hollywood performers suddenly find themselves bankrupt as they thought they had enough to live the high life without a care in the world
The current tax code invites abuse and needs to be used to fuel the boilers in DC federal buildings. We need a new taxcode, one in which everyone participates (yes, even those receiving Medicaid) and one in which the deduction loopholes and shelters are all closed.
We cannot afford the great welfare society. That utopia does not exist and we should stop feeding that beast (for poor, rich, and corporations alike).
I have to agree a lot with first part of your post. Most millionaire don't go spending tons of money. You won't see them driving Ferraris. They will likely buy modest home and car. They will work hard to save their money.
I'd just like to throw in the idea that Americans have a high standard for what is considered a "middle-class lifestyle". I mean, isn't middle class supposed to technically be what the median household makes, even if it's a low amount? (Maybe adjusted for cost of living relative to the rest of the US)
I mean, on the Long Island forum, you have people saying "You need at least $150,000 to be middle class on LI", when the median income is a little less than $90,000. But what is their definition of a "middle-class lifestyle"? Does it involve owning 3 fancy cars, a McMansion on an acre of land, and making sure everybody always has the fanciest gadgets?
There was a thread talking about "How much does the median income of a village/hamlet have to be for it to be considered poor?", and you had towns with incomes of over $90,000 being considered poor. Yeah, the area might not be the safest, and their homes may not be the nicest, but the lifestyles the people in those areas live generally aren't too bad.
The uber-wealthy are really the top 10% of the 1%. Most single and double digit millionaires (net worth) live a frugal lifestyle (see: The Millionaire Next Door). More frugal than those spending other people's money for their subsistance, IMO. Thus the saying: "It is not what you have, it is what you do not spend."
At a certain level of wealth unless one completely p*sses it away, day to day spending ceases to be as much of a concern. Once one approaches the hundreds of million$ in net wealth, p*ssing away becomes less of a concern and gives a false sense of security. This could explain why so many Hollywood performers suddenly find themselves bankrupt as they thought they had enough to live the high life without a care in the world
The current tax code invites abuse and needs to be used to fuel the boilers in DC federal buildings. We need a new taxcode, one in which everyone participates (yes, even those receiving Medicaid) and one in which the deduction loopholes and shelters are all closed.
We cannot afford the great welfare society. That utopia does not exist and we should stop feeding that beast (for poor, rich, and corporations alike).
I agree with most of what you say. The tax code should change. Not only to make it fair, but also to make it so people with above average intelligence like myself can then do their own taxes. It's ridiculous. Every year the government sends you a bill that you have to fill out yourself. And there are a bunch of rules and it makes your head hurt trying. Then if you get it wrong it can cost you dearly. Yes, change this.
I do disagree with everyone paying. I think only those able to work should pay. There are severely disabled that cannot work. Their small income comes from the government. They have little enough and shouldn't have to pay.
Some missing perspective: 25% of households (not individuals, households) in this country make less than $25,000 a year. 50% of households in this country make less than $50,000 a year. 80% of households in this country make less than $100,000 a year. An income of $250,000 to $1,000,000 a year is not by any stretch of the imagination middle class.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
