If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   We went from a neck-to-neck to a mouth-to-ass presidential race   (usatoday.com) divider line 194
    More: Followup, Mitt Romney, President Obama, presidential race, democratic convention, presidential debates, John McCain  
•       •       •

4787 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Sep 2012 at 10:08 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



194 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-09-14 10:44:04 AM  

Flab: hinten: Huh, I guess Fark doesn't filter for donkeys.

There are pages of words in the dictionary with "ass" in them. That filter would get overworked.


\b
 
2012-09-14 10:44:25 AM  

ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.


Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?
 
2012-09-14 10:46:32 AM  
Even if we assume that his "and less" doesn't mean 200k
 
2012-09-14 10:46:55 AM  

Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?


Does this person with $0 income have a refrigerator?
 
2012-09-14 10:46:56 AM  
I don't know how you can say that $250,000 a year is "middle income". I would have a hard time figuring out what to do with anything above $100K in my present way of living. Secondly, if $250,000 a year is middle income, why are people freaking out about teachers making $80,000? That's low, low middle income, surely they deserve more? Finally, the median income is somewhere around $45,000 per year. I find it hard to assert, with a straight face, that "middle income" is more than five times the median.
 
2012-09-14 10:47:37 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction


Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.
 
2012-09-14 10:48:03 AM  
Derp. Accidentally the comment.
Even if we assume that his "and less" doesn't mean 200k
 
2012-09-14 10:48:52 AM  

Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?


Didn't say middle class; he said middle income. $100,000 (more than twice the median national household income) doesn't fall in the middle range of incomes, so the cutoff point between middle income and low income is somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000. Makes sense, right?
 
2012-09-14 10:48:57 AM  
Derp. farkING HTML OKAY.
Even if we assume that his "and less" doesn't mean 200k < middle class < 250k, 100k is apparently not middle class. Giving him the benefit of the doubt its still 101k < middle class < 250k which is pants on head retarded.
 
2012-09-14 10:49:19 AM  

ModernLuddite: In the race between rhetoric and reality, reality apparently wins.

Sure, it wins by a slim margin, but it still has the advantage.


In a three-week span, the American people found out who was willing to put the big boy pants on and lead the country.

Sadly for the right-wingers, they found out they weren't the ones the American people want to lead.

Still a long way away...but the more Romney opens his mouth, the more Obama looks more Presidential.
 
2012-09-14 10:49:25 AM  

Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?


He was asked if 100k was middle income and he said 'No'. He then said it was from between 200k-250k and less.

So using that data we can determine that Mittens thinks that middle class is more than 100k, but less than 200-250k. I would call that the upper middle class. Professionals, higher management, and sales managers make this kind of money.
 
2012-09-14 10:49:32 AM  

Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?


He also went on to explain that he won't detail what he wants to do because doing so would make it harder for him to cooperate with Democrats in Congress.

Either he's lying about cooperation, and should be called on it by the Left and the Middle, or he's telling the truth and should be eaten alive by his own base.

/That last part sounds dirtier then it is.
 
2012-09-14 10:49:34 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.


I encourage people to watch the video. The "middle income" bit is nothing compared to how he's treating the embassy's statement in Egypt still.
 
2012-09-14 10:49:50 AM  

theorellior: I don't know how you can say that $250,000 a year is "middle income". I would have a hard time figuring out what to do with anything above $100K in my present way of living. Secondly, if $250,000 a year is middle income, why are people freaking out about teachers making $80,000? That's low, low middle income, surely they deserve more? Finally, the median income is somewhere around $45,000 per year. I find it hard to assert, with a straight face, that "middle income" is more than five times the median.


I think this may have been one of the rare cases when Romney's brain caught up to him before he finished the sentence.

"Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000..." wait, I can't say that! "...and less."
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2012-09-14 10:50:03 AM  

ltdanman44: Romney Smiles At News Of American Deaths In Libya


[www.addictinginfo.org image 500x334]


That's not a smile, it's more of a smirk.
 
2012-09-14 10:50:07 AM  

featurecreep: WTF does "$200,000 to $250,000 and less" mean?

Less than $250,000 but more than $200,000? That would seem to be the case since he said "No" when asked if $100,000 was middle-income.

This is after he denies having read the studies he cites to support his tax plan. Real presidential material right there.


I was thinking much the same.

The derp is strong with this one.
 
2012-09-14 10:50:18 AM  

Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true



MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.


Link

/have not read all the thread, sorry if its a repeat 
// 'and less', so $1K a year is middle income?
 
2012-09-14 10:51:22 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction

Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.


so is paraphrasing what he said as "The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year."
 
2012-09-14 10:52:05 AM  
Romney's middle class:

$0-------------$200K---------$250K--------$100K-------$500K---->
I-----> Middle Class <---------I--------> Poor <--------I-----> Rich?
 
 
2012-09-14 10:52:32 AM  

qorkfiend: theorellior: I don't know how you can say that $250,000 a year is "middle income". I would have a hard time figuring out what to do with anything above $100K in my present way of living. Secondly, if $250,000 a year is middle income, why are people freaking out about teachers making $80,000? That's low, low middle income, surely they deserve more? Finally, the median income is somewhere around $45,000 per year. I find it hard to assert, with a straight face, that "middle income" is more than five times the median.

I think this may have been one of the rare cases when Romney's brain caught up to him before he finished the sentence.

"Middle income is $200,000 to $250,000..." wait, I can't say that! "...and less."


I thought he was agreeing with BO's $200/250k line of private jet demarcation :)
 
2012-09-14 10:53:04 AM  

Grungehamster: Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?

Didn't say middle class; he said middle income. $100,000 (more than twice the median national household income) doesn't fall in the middle range of incomes, so the cutoff point between middle income and low income is somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000. Makes sense, right?


Actually just double checked the numbers: $100,000 is about 3x both the mean and median incomes in this country.
 
2012-09-14 10:53:07 AM  
If his plan is to be deficit neutral and he gets rid of the mortgage interest deduction, that would be a gut punch to those making $200-250k/year.
 
2012-09-14 10:53:13 AM  

Jairzinho: Romney's middle class:

$0-------------$200K---------$250K--------$100K-------$500K---->
I-----> Middle Class <---------I--------> Poor <--------I-----> Rich?


hehe
 
2012-09-14 10:53:45 AM  
 
2012-09-14 10:54:09 AM  

Grungehamster: Whatever libs; the non-partisan Citizens United poll just showed Romney having 8% more support in Missouri than in any other poll done of the state before this, and that is after Obama got his convention bump.

Come November 7th you libs are gonna be SO pissed, lol.

/Poe's Law off


i230.photobucket.com
 
2012-09-14 10:54:39 AM  

Grungehamster: Grungehamster: Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?

Didn't say middle class; he said middle income. $100,000 (more than twice the median national household income) doesn't fall in the middle range of incomes, so the cutoff point between middle income and low income is somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000. Makes sense, right?

Actually just double checked the numbers: $100,000 is about 3x both the mean and median incomes in this country.


that's median individual income you're using, I think
 
2012-09-14 10:54:40 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction

Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.

so is paraphrasing what he said as "The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year."



Tell us Skull, do you think $200,000- $2500,000 falls anywhere near middle income?
 
2012-09-14 10:54:54 AM  

Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?


He didn't put in a lower range. Of all the things you can be outraged over regarding Mittens, this isn't one of them.
 
2012-09-14 10:55:38 AM  
Ok. I got it right now....

Jairzinho: Romney's middle income:

$0-------------$200K---------$250K--------$100K-------$500K---->
I-----> Middle Income <---------I--------> below <--------I-----> Higher

 
2012-09-14 10:56:52 AM  

skullkrusher: Clowns in my Coffee: In before the apologists let him off the hook for "and less."

let him off the hook for what? The fact that he said "and less" means the hook shouldn't have been there in the first place. Granted, he didn't put a lower end of the range on that but that's not really what you're trying to be outraged about, is it?


C'mon now. It isn't even close.

Arugula....now that's reason for outrage. Arugula and 57 states.
 
2012-09-14 10:57:36 AM  
FTFA: Romney's sharp criticism of the president in recent days during the unfolding crisis in Libya has opened a new line of partisan attack against the challenger.

So is "partisan attack" a sort of shorthand for "justified moral opprobrium"?
 
2012-09-14 10:58:02 AM  

IHateHipHop: He didn't put in a lower range. Of all the things you can be outraged over regarding Mittens, this isn't one of them.


No. it's not something to be outraged about, but it does show what a clueless jackass he is.

$200k a year is rich. I don't CARE if you live in Manhattan and have 5 kids, you're still rich.

The median household income is just over $45,000. If you make 4 1/2 times the median income, you are rich.

Averages aren't a *FEELING*, they're farking math.
 
2012-09-14 10:58:10 AM  
So he has to define people in the top 2% of income as "middle income" to try to peddle the line that Obama's tax plans will/have raised incomes on "middle income" families according to his definition, with the assumption that it will be repeated without the clarification that he is using a word to mean something no one else would assume it means (unless they assume anything Romney says must be lies or at least deliberately deceptive).
 
2012-09-14 10:59:06 AM  

The Name: FTFA: Romney's sharp criticism of the president in recent days during the unfolding crisis in Libya has opened a new line of partisan attack against the challenger.

So is "partisan attack" a sort of shorthand for "justified moral opprobrium"?


Of course. It's especially partisan because it's being done by members of both parties.
 
2012-09-14 10:59:22 AM  
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: How about the film that seems to have sparked all this, the Innocence of Muslims film? Secretary Clinton today said she thought it was disgusting. How would you describe it?

MITT ROMNEY: Well, I haven't seen the film. I don't intend to see it. I you know, I think it's dispiriting sometimes to see some of the awful things people say. And the idea of using something that some people consider sacred and then parading that out a negative way is simply inappropriate and wrong. And I wish people wouldn't do it. Of course, we have a First Amendment. And under the First Amendment, people are allowed to do what they feel they want to do. They have the right to do that, but it's not right to do things that are of the nature of what was done by, apparently this film.

I like how Mitt Romney is going to be debating Obama, who was a Con law professor.
 
2012-09-14 10:59:36 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction

Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.

so is paraphrasing what he said as "The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year."


But it's quite reasonable to read it as between $100K and $200-250K. And that's still wrong.
 
2012-09-14 11:00:11 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction

Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.

so is paraphrasing what he said as "The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year."


Tell us Skull, do you think $200,000- $2500,000 falls anywhere near middle income?


so you agree that the websites should correct their comments? Because that's what I said that got you all subject changey.

Middle income and middle class are 2 different things. Middle income is a far more mathematically restricted notion. Obviously, in nominal dollars, $200-$250k falls outside of the middle of the income distribution so no, they would not be middle income.
 
2012-09-14 11:02:50 AM  
Mouth to ass? Let me explain something to you, subby.

www.sectalk.com
 
2012-09-14 11:03:23 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Cuthbert Allgood: ignatius_crumbcake: This morning Romney defined 'middle income' as people making between $200k and $250k. Way to go, Mittens.

Shut up! Seriously??

//please be true

Ambiguous and doesn't include the actual quote but this is the story

Here's the exact quote:

GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less. So number one, don't reduce- or excuse me, don't raise taxes on middle-income people, lower them. Number two, don't reduce the share of taxes paid by the wealthiest. The top 5% will still pay the same share of taxes they pay today. That's principle one, principle two. Principle three is create incentives for growth, make it easier for businesses to start and to add jobs. And finally, simplify the code, make it easier for people to pay their taxes than the way they have to now.

lots of websites are gonna have to run a correction

Defining "middle Income" as anything less than the top 1.5% is farking stupid.

so is paraphrasing what he said as "The Republican presidential nominee defined it as income of $200,000 to $250,000 a year."


Tell us Skull, do you think $200,000- $2500,000 falls anywhere near middle income?

so you agree that the websites should correct their comments? Because that's what I said that got you all subject changey.

Middle income and middle class are 2 different things. Middle income is a far more mathematically restricted notion. Obviously, in nominal dollars, $200-$250k falls outside of the middle of the income distribution so no, they would not be middle income.


But they are middle class? People in the top 2% of earners are middle class in your opinion?
 
2012-09-14 11:03:27 AM  

More_Like_A_Stain: But it's quite reasonable to read it as between $100K and $200-250K. And that's still wrong.


that's the logical reading of his exact wording, yes. It isn't middle income no matter how you slice it.
 
2012-09-14 11:04:53 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: But they are middle class? People in the top 2% of earners are middle class in your opinion?


Families earning up to $250,000 a year can certainly fall within the "middle class", yes.
 
2012-09-14 11:05:27 AM  
And lets talk about what the 'middle class' actually are.

The bottom 20% make between nothing and $18.5k per household.
The top 20% make over $92k per household (I am in here).
That leaves the middle 60% of American households making between $18.5k and $92k per year.

The way I think of the middle class is a little different.
The bottom 40% are our lower class. They make between $0 and $35k.
The middle class goes from 41% up to 95%. That represents household incomes from $35k to $167k.
The category of 'upper middle class' is occupied from 96%-99%. They make from $167k-$350k.

All of these people still have to work for a living. While the upper middle class are likely to become millionaires over time, they still have jobs or own businesses that they must continue to work at in order to continue their lifestyle.

That leave the top 1%. Incomes over $350k. The executives. Trust fund babies. The truly rich. The ownership class. Unless they are idiots, they should never have financial worries.
 
2012-09-14 11:05:49 AM  

what_now: IHateHipHop: He didn't put in a lower range. Of all the things you can be outraged over regarding Mittens, this isn't one of them.

No. it's not something to be outraged about, but it does show what a clueless jackass he is.

$200k a year is rich. I don't CARE if you live in Manhattan and have 5 kids, you're still rich.

The median household income is just over $45,000. If you make 4 1/2 times the median income, you are rich.

Averages aren't a *FEELING*, they're farking math.



25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-09-14 11:05:53 AM  

skullkrusher: Middle income and middle class are 2 different things.


Okay. I'll admit to ignorance here, as I've never heard this distinction before. At least not in any description of American society. Educate me, please.
 
2012-09-14 11:06:46 AM  

skullkrusher: Grungehamster: Grungehamster: Jairzinho: ignatius_crumbcake: GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Is $100,000 middle income?

MITT ROMNEY: No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less.

Huh? Can someone draw a graph and show what that range is? I have no farking idea what he meant. So is $0 dollar income still "middle class"?

Didn't say middle class; he said middle income. $100,000 (more than twice the median national household income) doesn't fall in the middle range of incomes, so the cutoff point between middle income and low income is somewhere between $100,000 and $200,000. Makes sense, right?

Actually just double checked the numbers: $100,000 is about 3x both the mean and median incomes in this country.

that's median individual income you're using, I think


That's what I get for using wikipedia to check my memory; I thought it was ~45K median, but checked and found something that said 32K for mean and 27K for median back in 2004 (turns out those were "equivalized" between countries). Turns out median is about 45K, with 50K being about the mean household income.
 
2012-09-14 11:06:56 AM  
Am I the only one laughing hysterically at the proposed "donkey" filter?

/kitty has reached critical mdonkey
 
2012-09-14 11:07:37 AM  

skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: But they are middle class? People in the top 2% of earners are middle class in your opinion?

Families earning up to $250,000 a year can certainly fall within the "middle class", yes.


That's farking stupid. Incredibly farking stupid.

People making in the top 1.5% of income do not fall into any rational definition of "Middle class".
 
2012-09-14 11:08:16 AM  

madgonad: All of these people still have to work for a living. While the upper middle class are likely to become millionaires over time, they still have jobs or own businesses that they must continue to work at in order to continue their lifestyle.


People who make between $167-$350k need to work to "continue their lifestyle" while people who make between 0-35k need to work to continue to eat.

Now, which one of these categories can spare some fng change for the tax man?
 
2012-09-14 11:09:44 AM  

More_Like_A_Stain: skullkrusher: Middle income and middle class are 2 different things.

Okay. I'll admit to ignorance here, as I've never heard this distinction before. At least not in any description of American society. Educate me, please.


as I said, "middle income" is about the income distribution. "middle class" is a much less well defined lifestyle or standard of living. They are used interchangeably but I think that is inaccurate. A family earning $40k and a family earning $80k obviously fall on different parts of the the national income distribution chart but they could have identical standards of living depending on where they live. That's why I find the distinction important.
 
2012-09-14 11:10:27 AM  

Philip Francis Queeg: skullkrusher: Philip Francis Queeg: But they are middle class? People in the top 2% of earners are middle class in your opinion?

Families earning up to $250,000 a year can certainly fall within the "middle class", yes.

That's farking stupid. Incredibly farking stupid.

People making in the top 1.5% of income do not fall into any rational definition of "Middle class".


Except that the conventional American definition of "middle class" is roughly "everyone who isn't actually homeless but also isn't as rich as Bill Gates".
 
Displayed 50 of 194 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report