What is "Middle Class?"
 

With all due respect to the threads here started by posters who think McCain had scored a recent coup against Obama, from my perspective Obama has won pretty much every exchange. I just noticed a new one. Obama criticized McCain for a recent remark that seems to define "rich" as those whose annual earnings are at least $5M.

McCain is an idiot for allowing the perception that "middle class" might include folks making just under $5M per year. His political "party" is already tatoo'd with the reputation of being the party that favors rich people and is out of touch with the middle class, lower middle class and working poor. He clings to the policies of the current "president" who (predictably) has offered up tax cut after tax cut for already-wealthy people.

McCain has been making Obama's job so easy anybody could do it. Recent policies and decisions have left the dwindling "middle class" and the classes below them hurty badly and likely to hurt more in the near future (inflation, folks, is going to get ugly). McCain and the Republicans are sitting ducks. Because of their policies.

If you actually watched the debate, it was quite obvious that McCain just threw the $5M comment out there offhandedly - in fact, he immediately said that the press would probably distort it. He was just making a joke that if you make $5M a year, that's rich. He wasn't trying to say that if you make $4.99M a year that you're middle class.

I liked McCain's answer - he said it doesn't matter how you define rich, because we shouldn't be raising taxes on anybody. I also liked his example of how "taxing the rich" tends to snag a lot of very hard working folks who own small businesses.

My uncle got an electrical engineering degree, then straight out of college went to work on an oil rig in Saudi Arabia. He got paid well, put all the money away, and when he came back, used all of that money (~$1M) to start a company with a few other folks. Through no fault of his own (the other fellas were cooking the books), he lost everything. He proceeded to save his money again, started a new company (on his own this time) and has spent nearly his entire life and mostly 80 hour work weeks on building up a business. He now makes around $300K a year. Obama's solution to all my uncle's hard work - he ought to be taxed more to support the lazy folks that can't get off their rears to find work. Guess what? I don't agree with that. I figure that for everything my uncle has gone through and the hard work literally his whole life to get to where he is, he deserves whatever he makes, and the government has no right to punish him for his success.

I agree with most of the other folks on the Board - McCain hit a home run the other night, and Obama, without his teleprompter, didn't do so well. By the way, a lot of people wonder how McCain seemed so prepared - he must have known the questions, right? I think it's a very easy answer - every time you see McCain at a campaign stop, he allows the audience to ask questions. Ergo, he's probably heard and formulated answers to most of the questions that were asked the other night. Obama, on the other hand, speaks with a teleprompter, rarely takes questions, and (quite obvious from his performance the other night), hates town hall-type meetings.

Ahhh yes. Labels. Categories. Groups. Where does one fit in?

Politicians love that game don't they? As do the 'talking heads' that bait them into answering such drivel.

What McCain (anyone) should have replied was, "Americans should not aspire to be 'middle class'."
_____________________


Quote: "McCain and the Republicans are sitting ducks. Because of their policies."

LOL... So how will one (and the Dems) explain away the upcoming loss in November this time? Swift boating? Diebold voting errors? Hanging chads?

I don't think middle class has that much to do with earnings. I certainly believe that "upper class" hardly exists regardless of earnings.

I can't quarrel with most of what you say Steve. But in spite of the more reasonable context in which McCain's remarks were made, he certainly tee'd the ball up for Obama.

I never liked Dubya but those of you who did....probably found his verbal mistakes charming. Well, even you guys probably don't find those mistakes charming any more. For a bowling buddy, they're charming. For the President of the United States of America, they are not.

Which brings me to something many of you have noticed about Obama. If a candidate really wanted to be candid with voters, he would still need to strike a balance between giving them that.....and giving them the actual truth. Some people are very simple thinkers. Black and white. I think conservatives tend to be more this way. I do not say this out of criticism. I think liberals are more "circumspect" thinkers. Lots of shades of grey. One of the things I have come to know with relative certainty is that the most correct answer to most questions is: It depends.

We've had enough of politicians that pander to corporate interests. We've had enough of politicians who shoot from the hip and defy conventional wisdom. We've had enough of politicians with "guns blazin'," arrogant, Texas-attitude. Sure, McCain is trying hard to be decisive. And it's going to hurt him many more times before this is over.

Only because Obama lacks integrity. Obama turned McCain's comment about how it doesn't matter how long troops are in Iraq if they aren't being shot at (like Korea and Germany) into "McCain wants to continue the Iraq war for another 100 years."

So it's clear that Obama will play dumb and try to exploit the $5 million line, even though he knows it's a lie.

Here's the corollary to your question Supe, and one that makes more of a difference to your candidates taxation plan. What defines rich?

Seems to me Mr. Obama feels a family of four making $250k a year are "rich" and should have their taxes raised. My wife and I both work, and we are almost to that $250k per year mark. We have 3 kids and one on the way. We are putting money away for retirement and starting to try to save for college.

Funny, I don't feel rich...

Mr. Obama apparently thinks I should give him some $6000 extra per year for social security and another $12000 per year just for general purposes. Well, to tell you the truth if that happens our ability to adequately fund the 529 plans for our children will be drastically reduced. So, shall I exchange my kid's college fund so Mr. Obama and his democrat buddies can squander my money pandering to their voters? I think not.

Thank you!

That's pretty typical of the average American success story. Obama thinks your uncle should be punished for his success. :mad:

Wasn't it senator Dick Gephardt who referred to some of us as "lucky sperm"? Makes me sick.

USMC at 17, went to undergraduate part time at night while working full time, ditto for my MBA. Put myself though with no financial aid (sorry baby, wrong color). Saved, trying to buy my first house 750 sq. ft. Moved up over 30 years of work, and I'm the lucky one? Give me a break.

I still don't know what "middle class" is. Is it in Orange County or some parts of Riverside County, what is middle class in Arkanssass, is it the same as middle class in upper New York? Is rich the same in Hollywood as it is in Bangladash?
Rich to me is 5 million dollars, but that doesn't mean you have to have 5 million to be rich. I don't think McCain made any mistakes there.
Obama's gaffs will be the above my pay grade
and
there is evil in Darfur and in the American cities. You have to confront evil with humility.

When the question is "What do you believe…..?" "It depends" is a totally inadequate answer.

For someone who seems to have issues with shooting from the hip I find your distortions and mischaracterizations amusing.

You may feel better if you can put labels on people but that just doesn’t work, as you said it is often more complicated than that.

Actually, I prefer the curad brand over band aid...

I grew up blue collar, working middle class, lower middle class, whatever you want to call it. we did not take vacations. we had used bikes. A Chevy station wagon and a Chevy pick-up lasted for a decade each, and then they were replaced with used. We did not really go to the doctor much, nor the dentist. Investment in anything wasn't ever a consideration. When we moved once, we couldn't afford the same size modest home we'd always had, so the family room was my bedroom for a year. I'm the only one in my family to go to college, which I paid for. We were extremely provincial, unsophisticated and naive about the bigger world around us. We were uncomfortable around comfort.

As my father was a boat mechanic, our extravagance was having a decent 22 foot boat, but only after a summer's restoration. We went fishing and camping every weekend while living in MN. We cut a lot of wood in the fall and burned it all winter. We lived within our means for the most part.

I'm sure that there are many families living in the U.S. today that make what my mom and dad, adjusted for inflation. But I don't think that many live the way we did, instead credit cards adding to their "net income" allowing folks to move one notch up on the ladder.

I think many people who feel like they are middle class really aren't. They are either making a good living and saving for the future or making a good living and living beyond their means. Either way, these people may not have a lot of money in their personal bank accounts at the end of each month, but they make too much to be considered middle class.

McCain was right. $5 million is rich.

"Middle Class" has simply become a label for the regular folks. The ones with a mortgage, kids in school, trying to do the best they can to provide for themselves and their families. The ones that always try to pay their bills on-time and constantly try to figure-out how to do things better. Below "middle class" exists those who believe the rest of us should support their lack of effort. Housing, Health-care, & cable. The ones that don't pay their bills, and that are always looking for someone to tell them it's OK, and it's not their fault. This is Obama-Land.
There is no dollar amount that defines the term. It has to do with character, not money.

Well said.

Hey Supe, in the midst of your opening Bush bashing drivel, you threw out the party line about "tax cuts for the wealthy". Seriously, are you that stupid? At the time of the Bush tax cuts, I was working full time and attending college. I was supporting my wife and 1 child (at the time) on MAYBE $25k/year. Those tax cuts helped us get a hefty refund. As I find myself stating to you quite often here recently, don't just throw out the party line and expect people to buy in. Generally speaking, this audience is too smart for that. There's nothing that makes my accountant wife more angry than hearing about the "Bush tax cuts for the rich", because it's total BS.

As for the topic at hand, I would also state that people in America now feel entitled to the middle class, either via debt or public assistance. The day of working your ass off to make a better life for your family is gone. Those of us that do are now expected to support those that don't. The Constitution promises equity, right? Or was that the Communist Manifesto........

Shaun84, that was a good post.

Across the USA their are wide discrepancies in income for families that may be considered "middle class". In a high wage, high tax and expensive place like NYC - a couple earning a combined $200K might have a standard of living that would cost $100,000 in a low tax and lower cost place..

Exactly. Politicians in generaland liberals in particular love nothing more than classifying Americans by this or that group, individuals be damed. We're all supposed to be ingroups so pols can more easily pander.

To me, middle class has more to do w/ how much you save, not how much you make. I know people who make $250,000 a year and spend every penny as soon as it comes in the door. They have all the toys. They have no savings. They would also have to rely on uncle sam if the shlt hit the fan or they lost their source of income. I know others who make $100,000 a year and save religiously. They are building wealth and see themselves as becoming wealthy at some point in the future.

One group is waiting for the government to take care of them and the other is going to take care of themselves.

$1M a year is not wealthy if you piss it all away, get my point. I also know school teachers who have retired millionaires. They still consider themselves middle class.

Politicians just use the term "middle class" to make you feel like they are needed in order to give you the hand outs.

Just from observation
 

The Democrats rate those with no earned income as poor, those making minimum wage as middle class and those making more than minimum wage rich. If you listen to what the Democrats have said in the past and what B.O. says today this fits.

That sounds right and he is going to be "Robin Hood" stealing from the rich and giving to the poor!

No, it doesn’t. He said families at 150K should not have any increase, but at 250K the increase should start

No, it isn’t to support lazy people, it is to pay the bills.

http://www.apa.org/pi/wpo/myths.html

Yes, you are. And you are on the far side of the bell curve.

They above examples cite an EE who got a sweet deal and Hugh got an MBA. You guys are not average. The posters on this board are predominantly high earners.

I don’t know how this myth started: that people who don’t make as much as most of us are lazy. They aren’t. Most people in the workforce couldn’t do the things high earners do. They are doing the best they can.

If you look at sales, state income, local income and real estate taxes in places like New York or San Jose - $250K is not a lot of money. More like $140K in much of rural America. Why should we bear the brunt of Obama's tax increases?:confused:

$250K around here could be a teacher married to a dentist... Not exactly living on Park Avenue. More like 1+ hour commutes to a three bedroom house.

Not this crap again. I've known a lot of people that weren't particularly smart that made something of themselves. Hell, I make decent money as an engineer, but there's experienced licensed plumbers that make better money. There are MANY trade related jobs that don't require formal education, but can be quite lucrative. Your mistake is correlating book smarts and money. Common sense, business acumen, and work ethic can carry you a long way in America.

Further, "that money is to pay the bills". Where do you suppose those "bills" come from? Possibly an ever increasing spread of social entitlement programs? Not to mention government regulation of EVERYTHING? You know, when I need more money, I try to cut spending. Perhaps government can learn a lesson from the personal finances of many Americans? Of course, I don't have the luxury of stealing money out of everyone else's pockets when I want to increase my spending.

I make under 150 and do okay in San Jose, at 250K I would be doing very well indeed.

The brunt would be carried by the rich, and I catagorize >1M/yr as rich.

I am not simply correlating book smarts and money, but that is the common thread in the examples given.

Why not address the real question?

Are people who make less than mosty of us simply lazy people who don't work hard enough??

I believe class standing is determined by financial situation and income doesn't necessarily determine financial situation.

Yep. social security, medicare, medicaid, unemployment and welfare make up 55% of the budget not counting the wars we fund.

If you can find a reasonable means to decrease these you should be in Congress.

A time limit on welfare would be a good start! Hell, even Bill Clinton knew that...

Mr. Clinton's call for a limit on welfare was part of his claim to be a responsibility-oriented Democrat, and as President he has continued to say he will "end welfare as we know it."

Randy

You're kidding me, right? People are in Congress because they are exceptionally talented at kissing ass, lying, and fundraising. Real solutions? Riiiiiiight.:rolleyes:

You want my ideas?
Social Security: Privatize it, allow individuals to actually receive a return on their investment, as opposed to the nothing that money makes with the govt. Make it like a 401k, but don't allow early withdrawls.

Unemployment: WTF is unemployment? Throughout my years as a blue collar worker (prior to returning to college), I never had trouble finding a new job. Why should people get a check to take their sweet time finding work? Buh bye.

Welfare: Make it based on pure physical need. If you're a paraplegic, you should get government assistance. If you have a mild physical disability, you're on your own. If you're lazy or have 10 kids (from different daddies), you're SOL. I have a coworker with one arm, the other is a stub from a birth defect. He used to do engineering drafting, ride motorcycles, and was a private pilot. So don't tell me that your back pain keeps you from sitting at a desk somewhere.

So, how much have I saved thus far? I'd be willing to bet that I've saved enough to reduce taxes and still take a serious bite out of our national debt.

Your question insinuates that there should be equity, "make less than most of us". That's not life, sorry. So lets change it to be more relevant.

Are people who make too little to live comfortably simply lazy people who don't work hard enough

To that I would answer, yes. In America we have an abundance of good jobs where a good living can be made. If you're willing to work hard, you can still live comfortably.

at most, 20% of the population is qualified AND has the time to manage an investment portfolio.

Privatization and deregulation guarantees corruption.

I am agreeable to an opt-out program after you pass an investment proficiency class and test.

The result, otherwise, is a social bailout on twice the scale of the typical corporate/banking bailout, and 3x leaving SS alone.

You're right. The fed. gov't. has done a much better job than I could have done. They know best and have my best interests at heart. :rolleyes:

Rick, I don't understand your post as it relates to mine.

if you are in the 20% that has both the time and knowledge, great! I recommended a proficiency class and test that would allow you to opt out of the government-run program.

I don't understand why you posted what you did. Please explain.

Nice to see how stupid you think the average American is.:rolleyes:

Thank God the govt is running things. I'll spend my entire life paying in. When I'm 65, I'm confident that it will have all been pissed away on other "more important" things. If it's still there, it will have grown at an astounding 0% interest. Well done Uncle Sam!

By giving Americans options such as bonds or mutual funds, there would be reasonably safe investment options available.

+1

And I especially love how our politicians continue to use 'scare tactics" with "my" money, telling me it won't be there for me in the future! :rolleyes:

Randy

Yes, the average American is completely unsophisticated when it comes to investment Matt. Please do me a favor and reconcile the housing crisis and massive credit card debt with being able to manage a lifetime of investment. I applaud you for your hope and faith in the average American being able to manage a portfolio, sadly, reality is cruel master.

But it's not just about investment knowledge and sophistication. it's about time. the Average American does not have time I believe.

And it's also about grades and school. Matt, the bell curve is real and exists. 50% of our population is below average.

For smart people like yourself who have the time to manage a portfolio, I have recommended the class and test.

When compiling the reconciliation, please show your work.

When it comes to investing, the average American is stupid. Wall Street has come to rely on this stupidity in recent years with the rise of the 'retail investor' If you privatize SS, the fleecing will begin in earnest.

What you're missing is that SS isn't really a retirement program: it's an extra layer of income tax, but run as a ponzi scheme.

Shawn, I'm actually not even proposing a wide open program. Make it similar to a 401k, where you have a variety of programs available, most mutual fund based. You provide Americans with a book that describes each program, with it's risks and rewards. You then allow them to pick several for the purpose of diversification, say 3. For a simple program like that, you could summarize the benefits of diversification and balancing risk/reward on one page. ANYONE can invest in mutual funds.

Hell, even bonds or CDs are a better option. Guaranteed return, no risk. It's better than NOTHING, which is what the money earns right now.