We make 250,000/year. I'm not a f***ing billionaire

Total Federal govt spending in 2000 was $2.3 trillion. Revenues were $2.6 trillion, for a surplus of $0.3 trillion

Total Federal govt spending in 2012 was $3.6 trillion, an increase of almost 50%. Revenues were $2.4 trillion, or a deficit of $1.1 trillion.

The average annual deficit in the Bush years was $500 billion

The average annual deficit in the Obama years was $1.3 trillion

nuff said

michiganxcrunner wrote:

Maybe if you bought some American cars for once, our economy would be a little better. Then we wouldn't need to tax rich folks like you.

It's selfish purchases like those that have put Americans out of work. By neglecting our industry, you've helped suppress the middle class. Why should people sympathize for you and your upper class when you've shown no regard for the other classes yourself?

Would you recommend purchasing an American card assembled in Mexico or Canada?

Another thing that leads to all this b!tching is people not managing their budget well.

I have been in a lot of debt and had a low income earlier in my life. Tons of stress, jealousy about what others could afford, anger about taxes, etc.

Then, I worked my way out of it and increased my income and erased my debt. I can tell you, there is no better thing in the world to have your financial house in order. No stress. Tons of excess money to do pretty much whatever you want with it.

For a few months, I was paying off $2500 in debt per month. When I got that debt paid off, I had $2500 to do whatever I wanted to every month.

Think of what $2500 can buy. I had choices. I could buy two new 60" TV's every month and fill my house with them. I could lease 5 brand new Mercedes-Benzes. I could repaint the exterior of my house every month. I could get new furniture in a different room every month. New carpet. Every year, I could buy a $30,000 boat and at the end of the year, I could just sink it for fun.

People that make $200k per year and are whining about money are doing something wrong. I can do almost anything I want. Go live on $50k per year, with debt, for a few years. You'll realize how ridiculously wealthy you are when you are pulling in $200k.

Where is the cut-off for "rich" if it's not the top 2%?

You can make a lot more than $250k and live a lifestyle that results in your having to live paycheck to paycheck.

To the OP: ending deductions would hurt you MUCH more than an increase in tax rates, which would make you pay basically nothing more if you "only" make $250k

cut spending wrote:

Total Federal govt spending in 2000 was $2.3 trillion. Revenues were $2.6 trillion, for a surplus of $0.3 trillion

Total Federal govt spending in 2012 was $3.6 trillion, an increase of almost 50%.

Our education system obviously failed this poster.

■In fiscal year 2012, Washington spent $88 billion on K–12 and vocational education, nearly triple the amount of just 10 years ago, after adjusting for inflation. Yet these huge infusions of federal funds to these state and local priorities have failed to improve educational performance

■Transportation outlays have risen by $25 billion, or 33 percent, over the past 10 years. Budget authority, which takes several years to spend out, increased by $53 billion, or 61 percent over 10 years. Costly transit projects and low-value transportation enhancement programs for bicycle and horse trails and roadside transportation museums are fueling the increased spending, even though they do not improve mobility or relieve traffic congestion

You balance the budget via a combination of increased revenues plus spending cuts. I said I want to see spending cuts. The trouble is you cannot cut enough spending to balance the budget. If the US government demonstrates that it can take a balanced approach and get our budget in order, it will send a very positive message to the markets and investments will increase and the private sector will flourish. That is what happened under Clinton. Business is holding back on investing now due to all the uncertainty.

cut spending wrote:

Total Federal govt spending in 2000 was $2.3 trillion. Revenues were $2.6 trillion, for a surplus of $0.3 trillion

nuff said

Clinton was still President in 2000.

As for how and why we got to where we are in 2012 and where we're going from here, there's this:

cut spending wrote:

■In fiscal year 2012, Washington spent $88 billion on K–12 and vocational education, nearly triple the amount of just 10 years ago, after adjusting for inflation. Yet these huge infusions of federal funds to these state and local priorities have failed to improve educational performance

■Transportation outlays have risen by $25 billion, or 33 percent, over the past 10 years. Budget authority, which takes several years to spend out, increased by $53 billion, or 61 percent over 10 years. Costly transit projects and low-value transportation enhancement programs for bicycle and horse trails and roadside transportation museums are fueling the increased spending, even though they do not improve mobility or relieve traffic congestion

Well, like the guy that agreed with the OP, you can't put a price on increased quality of life. Maybe those cash infusions just made schools "nicer" for kids to attend.

2000 Revenues were buoyed by the massive dot.com stock market bubble.

two sides to the coin, baby:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/10/federal-spending-by-the-numbers-2012

troll? (8/10 if so. the 5 car insurance payments seems a bit excessive) but I'll bite anyway.i make nearly a factor of 10 LESS than you a year and i am likely a doing a more important job than whatever the hell you do IMO (i research cancer and the development of the immune system). so I guess I am that "ANYONE, you mention...wow, if you don't see how people could consider you rich, you are completely out of touch with the situations of others. hearing anyone complain about financial troubles when then make >100K per year makes me want to vomit. those troubles are self-induced by spending on things you don't need, not because of any tax burden. have your kids ever worked??? even a part-time job could cover the insurance & help with tuition...

If you make 250k a year, you are actually quite wealthy. If you feel otherwise, you are simply overspending. Let's put it this way. I'm in grad school and have a stipend of $28k. I live pretty comfortably and typically am able to buy almost everything I want in addition to being able to stock up some savings (I have never had a real job, have not inherited any money, and yet I will be buying my next car for probably 10-12k in cash). You should sell a car or two, make the kids share, and save more. In reality, supporting your wife, kids, and mother, shouldn't cost any more than 80k if you're willing to stop spending so much.

cut spending wrote:

■In fiscal year 2012, Washington spent $88 billion on K–12 and vocational education, nearly triple the amount of just 10 years ago, after adjusting for inflation. Yet these huge infusions of federal funds to these state and local priorities have failed to improve educational performance

How do you know it failed? The fiscal year only recently ended.

If you make 250k a year, you are actually quite wealthy. If you feel otherwise, you are simply overspending. Let's put it this way. I'm in grad school and have a stipend of $28k. I live pretty comfortably and typically am able to buy almost everything I want in addition to being able to stock up some savings (I have never had a real job, have not inherited any money, and yet I will be buying my next car for probably 10-12k in cash). You should sell a car or two, make the kids share, and save more. In reality, supporting your wife, kids, and mother, shouldn't cost any more than 80k if you're willing to stop spending so much.

Very sound advice for the federal government

Considering I live on

t94bell wrote:

0/10.

JESUS CHRIST, FINALLY.

cut spending wrote:

■In fiscal year 2012, Washington spent $88 billion on K–12 and vocational education, nearly triple the amount of just 10 years ago, after adjusting for inflation. Yet these huge infusions of federal funds to these state and local priorities have failed to improve educational performance

Earth to nimrod wrote:

How do you know it failed? The fiscal year only recently ended.

Oh, okay. Never mind.

While I hear you, i also hear the words, "marginal tax rate." Unless I misunderstand it, increases would be on excess of 250K only. Totally agree on cutting wasteful defense/military ind spending! There are not really that many entitlements.

I will acknowledge this for sure. And I also acknowledge that because I make $150k that I am able to supply my wife, and soon-to-be child, with a nice lifestyle.

If I did lose my job, and couldnt find anything similar, we would probably move to a more affordable area. Completely agree.

My whole point is that you can't fault the OP for providing a nice environment for his family. Can he live in a crappy area in Alabama where his money goes much farther, yes. But he chooses this lifestyle. I don't feel bad for him, yet I would never consider him to be rich.

Oddly, I haven't seen that many posters faulting the OP for providing a nice lifestyle for his family. Most, if not all, are pointing out that having a lifestyle which puts the OP in the top 1% of families in the US, doesn't fit very well with his bitching about a very minor tax increase.