RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events What do you consider rich or middle class? Serious question .

This is a serious question and I would genuinely like to hear what the left leaning members think about this. I want to hear from the right as well. Please don't post You Tubes or google articles.....just tell me what you really think is rich and or middle class.


I would love for McCain and Palin to put Obama and Biden on the spot with this exact question in the debates.

My personal belief is pretty simple. If you have to work for a living you are not rich. Rich people to me are retired, don't work and sit around and play golf or travel all the time....they don't work anymore. I live near a town with many Goldman Sachs employees. When they went public in the late 90s people in their late 20s and early 30s became mega millionaires. Some of them still work but I actually know a few of them from the gym and they don't do shit anymore. THAT IS RICH.

The area of NJ where I live has some well off middle class people but many are not rich. 100 grand 150 grand and even in some places 200 grand are still not enough to make ends meet in some of these towns. Seriously. And if the people are small business owners it is even worse for them.

Dems/liberals use class warfare all the time. They pit the real middle class against lazy parasites who think they deserve what their neighbor has without ever working for it. It sickens me. I work hard for what little I have.....why should I give it to the government so they can hand out welfare to lazy people. If they are deserving of government aid then fine but I'd guess 60% of the aid given out is to lazy sacks of shit.

I guess it really does matter where you live as well. I recently saw some beautiful homes in Georgia and the Carolinas going between 20,000 and 100,000.

That is not even a down payment around here. There are still places in NJ where you can get a decent townhouse or condo for 100,000 but not much else and definitely not a home.

Even the estate tax is incredibly unfair. I believe that they should tax the very rich estates but cap it at around 10 - 20 million. Anything over 20 million tax the hell out of it.

I'm like you. rich means you dont have to work again if you dont want to(I'm not talking about welfare whomod.)

How many children you have and their ages weighs in on the equation. Also your location, for example where I live you can get a great house for 150k, a lot of Doctors and lawyers from the city locate here just for the enormity of a house they can get for a fraction of the price.

I would say if your net worth is over 2 million you are rich. But I think the middle class ends in the 250k mark, you aren't rich at 250k a year, a minor disaster could bankrupt you, but you rent living on the edge.

The median income where I live is 30k a year, and the average family is three, so poverty level is the norm around here.

It's horrible but by that definition you are middle class by the dems.

As critical as they are for about the poor, benefits under Bush has been greater. By benefits I'm not simply talking money but help in getting to work, staying at work, and educating.

The Job and Family services here gives $50 a month to poverty or below working people for gasoline, they'll pay up to $2500 a year for repairs for work transportation, there is free daycare or nightcare for those working or going to college below the poverty level. These are things needed to pull people out of an endless cycle, one car breakdown and someone is out a job, with college they can get ahead and out of poverty. The checks and foodstamps still come, but these projects brought in under a GOP administration are helping people get beyond that.

It honestly depends completely in the area, or even state, where you live. In Northeastern Ohio where middle class jobs are leaving at a sickening rate, under $29,999 is lower class; 30,000-59,999 is middle and 60,000 + is upper class. We have quite a few million dollar homes here, but that's because the prices of homes and property is so reasonable that more than a few millionaires live here and fly elsewhere for work 3-4 days a week, and even then there's a trailer park not too far from my house that houses a few millionaires simply because they don't want to take care of property and the trailer parks are cheap enough to keep them millionaires without working so hard to stay that way.

I tend to agree with both of you on the definition. In fact, it reminds me of the definition given once by Mrs. Huxtable on the "Cosby Show," which I always thought was a good one: If you work for your money you aren't rich, if your money works for you, you're rich.

this is exactly why you can't vote just on party. Robert A. Taft II a Republican used his eight years in office to tax and spend Ohio out of all it's good jobs. I was talking to the owner of the factory where I work and he said honestly if he knew Ohio's taxes were going to go up so dramatically they would have located to Indiana or KEntucky. Taxing the rich more than their fair share seems like a good idea to some on the surface, but in reality it costs the working man jobs.

Cost of living affects what a money amount would be. I always thought if you had an income where you could buy a home, put food on the table & afford a couple of luxeries you were middle class. From my experience people tend to have very different ideas about what is middle class. It's pretty rare to run into somebody who says their rich. If they can afford to buy a new car every other year & own multiple properties, their not rich because they don't have a huge pool or something.

I thank MEM for answering the question. I also find it troubling that he is the only liberal poster that would even attempt to answer the question. It has always bothered me when the dems do this. Just today Nobama was going on and on about tax cuts for the middle class and wanting to tax the rich.

Well Nobama you and your dem cronies who many are worth over 100 million dollars may know how to get around paying taxes but we little guys are getting creamed.

also I would like to commend MEM for not being a closet Muslim terrorist like Obama as well.

yeah and a terrorist like Ayers.

yeah, at least MEM isnt a fucking terrorist lover. good job MEM.

Tom Brady is rich. The guy who issues his paycheck, is wealthy. Seriously,.. apx $60,000 a year is middle-uppermiddle class in most places. $100,000 a year,is getting there,if you don't spend it all before you get it. I had a friend who spent $300,000 in 3 months. He thought he was rich.,now he is homeless. One million dollars use to make you rich... not any more. You become rich, when your money works for you, and you can stay ahead.

How do you spend 300,000 in 3 months? Was it on a home (probably not you said he is homeless) or maybe a Bentley?

I could spend 300k on hookars! Maybe with that much money I can get one that doesn't look like King Booker.

Under Obama's tax plan there is significant tax relief for 95% of the population. Who do you define as the little guy?

probably the same thing you define as significant.

Nice Obama words, but I'd like to know how he's going to give 95% of the population tax relief and still pay for all his socialized programs like healthcare without taxing the rich to the point that they are middle class.

Funny you should mention that. Over in the Weekly Standard, Newt Gingrich and Peter Ferrara dissect Barack Obama's claim to cut taxes on 95 percent of "working families."

Neither candidate's tax plan adds up. Obama's plan sounds the closest to Clinton's while McCain is more like Bush's.

So your admitting it cant be done but you like the way it sounds.

McCain wants the Bush tax cuts but also a decrease in spending that he chided Bush over not doing. I think that's a better plan than just increasing taxes and spending more money. All the amendments that people keep throwing around about wanting (anti-gay marriage, allowing naturalized foreigners to run for pres.), the one we need is a fucking balanced budget amendment and a line item veto.

it might have something to do with the (D) after black dukakis's name.

Heh, so the thing you jump on isn't that neither of them have a tax plan but all your interested is that Obama's doesn't.

BTW, I said neither added up. This is all pretty reminiscent of when Bill Clinton ran against the first Bush. We were told it couldn't be done then too. Right now it doesn't add up but I could see Obama's plan putting us on the right track & getting back to where the numbers add up.

so you think raising taxes and expanding government spending is a good plan to get the economy rolling. that's brilliant if i understand it correctly.

It's more of a case of getting rates back to where Bill Clinton had them. When he ran for President pretty much the same rhetoric was levelled at him or anytime a democrat has ran since. McCain has said he'll cut pork, I've heard that before too. Maybe it's time to go back to what actually worked.

brilliant!

.. the fool did spend $ on hookers.. would call one of his friends, and chat while snorting coke of their bellies.. He bought a 30.000$ Indian "Silver Cloud"motorcycle, brand new, even though he didn't know how to ride,..suddlenly had a bunch of "new friends" pop up out of nowhere,to help him with all that $..and stroke his ego until all the $ was gone! He now has nothing,.. lost his wife,and son.. all his collection of movies,dvd's,and computer games,.. several autos,..but still has the Silver Cloud.

I don't think I'm rich, but I grew up poor, so I know the difference between having no money and being comfortably affluent.

A few weeks before I was born, my dad - a fitter and turner by trade- was working on a ship in Fremantle Harbour and caught a piece of steel in his right eye. It ruined it but more to the point he had a very heavily pregnant wife, he had no insurance or workers comp available to him, and things for them were just fucked.

They got over it by at first living on a leg of ham a week, relying upon donations from my dad's friends, and eventually rentng their house out and moving to Sydney to live with my grandmother for a few years until my dad got better.

I remember the tail end of those days, and even when my folks split for a year and we moved with my mum back to Sydney when I was 6, things were really tough. As a kid I think you're cognizant of these things, and my wife now jokes that I never waste any food because I knew what it was like to be without it.

Nowadays thigns are different. I'm not going to tell you how much I earn, but I can say its more money than I thought I'd ever earn: this year I got a ten percent bonus: if we sold up our assets and down-graded I could retire. A very snobby South African once said to me I must be proud to no longer be a poor white (!).

I'm not embarrassed about having money because I worked my arse off to get here. I worked three part-time jobs to get myself through my law degree. The only money I ever inherited I used to pay for a masters degree. Otherwise, I got here through being relentless, disciplined, and through hard work.

In Australia we have a very high tax regime. 48% of my income goes in tax. That's more than any of you pay, I guarantee it. We also have a ten percent goods and services tax, very high state government stamp duty on the sale of real estate, capital gains tax on the sale of assets like shares and property, local government rates on property, and assorted other taxes like payroll tax on business.

So, I certainly contribute more in taxes than on the face of it I get back from government. (I don't enjoy paying tax - remember, I lived in Hong Kong for 4 years to try an avoid them for a while.)

Now I am back, however, and have been back for 5 years, what do I get out of my taxes though which I value?

a. a universal free health system. No one should have to be turned away from a hospital. There are problems with it in elective surgery and waiting times, but for emergencies its excellent.

b. the best infrastructure system in the region. Road and rail here are fantastic.

c. social security for those people who can't get a job, which means they don't have to break into my house to steal my stuff to feed their kids. There are plenty of free riders (its human nature to have free riders), but I'm happy to suffer that if it means the people who need the help get it.

d. the best defence force in the region.

e. a heavily subsidised university education, for those who want it.

Class warfare? As a concept I find it very dated. Unions annoy the crap out of me. But I do acknowledge that some people are poor - hell, like I said, I was there - and so I don't begrudge the fact that the government has to tax me to keep those people out of abject poverty.

I've also had the fortune to go to countries around Asia where governments do not for whatever reason effectively tax the wealthy and affluent and so I've seen kids living in dumps and teenaged girls turn to prostitution. Singapore through clever taxation and encouragement of investment turned a shitty smelly city into a gleaming metropolis and financial centre. Sensible taxation to fund welfare and education is a good thing.

g-man will be along soon to tell you that you don't know anything about your health care.

I thought about it, but didn't want to derail the thread. I figure I'll correct him again in the future.

Healthcare here works well. My sister has a 6 year old in a wheelchair who can't eat, speak or move. My sister hasn't had to put her hand in her pocket for the entire 6 years.

I don't understand the US healthcare system.

me neither, im with you dave! the thing that is bizarre about our healthcare system is the hypocrisy. if someone is drowning in a pond and you have a lifesaver and you tell them i'll throw it in to you for $50 bucks, and they say i dont have $50 and you walk away that's murder. if a child has a busted liver and the hospital says we need $900k for the transplant they say they dont have, and the hospital walks away, that's acceptable.

That is not a sign of a government with correct priorities.