Yikes, there's a lot of vitriol on this thread.
Look, OP, I make a little more than 1/10th what you make. I'm young and single and my income is only going to go up, in all likelihood.
I'm not jealous of you. I'm glad you make a good living. I confess to being a little confused about how you make that kind of income without apparently having any idea how deductions and marginal rates work (unless of course your 250k quoted earnings refers to your income post-deductions). Nonetheless, I bear you no ill will.
However, I think it's abject nonsense that returning to highest marginal rate under Clinton is somehow an inconceivable act of class warfare. As several have pointed out, for every 1000 dollars you earn at the highest marginal rate, the expiration of the Bush/Obama tax cut (Bush's idea, Obama extended 'em) will cost you an additional 46 dollars. Regardless of what you're spending, an additional $46 dollars above what you pay now on income above the threshold for the highest marginal rate should not be breaking your bank.
That being said, of course the US needs to reduce spending. Any person being intellectually honest could tell you the mess we're in is going to require additional revenue and lower spending.
At the same time, the top earners in this country pay less in taxes than at almost any other time in US history. We have a more lopsided income distribution than is ideal for economic growth. Absolutely, some inequality is necessary. Yet, social mobility in the US is now lower than Sweden. I don't think this is good for America's long-term economic stability. I don't like the demonization of the poor any better than I like the demonization of the rich, either. There are tons of hard-working people who love their jobs and are never going to make 250k a year. Most of these people have no problem with that, but there's no need for the top earners to sneer at these people, either.
If tax rates and revenue as a percentage of GDP were at all time highs and America still had high degrees of social mobility, I would not support higher marginal tax rates, even though my income is way, way less than the OP's. But the fact of the matter is that tax rates are near their lowest points historically and the capacity of a hard-workin' average Joe to rise up a statistically significant amount in the income distribution is below that same capacity for an average Sven in Sweden.
Yes, we need to cut spending. But yes- we need to raise revenues. Since middle- and lower-class incomes have stagnated and upper-class incomes have skyrocketed in the last few decades, well, you can understand why the tax cut expiration is going to impact top earners more than middle and bottom earners.