Rep. McMahon Pushes To Extend All Bush Tax Cuts: Earning $250K ‘Is Barely Making Ends Meet’

There has recently been a slew of conservative voices arguing that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy should be extended because $250,000 in yearly income is really not that much money. For instance, Fox News’ Martha MacCallum said “people who make $250,000 — in some parts of this country, they may not consider themselves rich,” while CNN’s Karin Chetry added that “some would argue that in some parts of the country that ($250,000) .” Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele even said “trust me, after taxes, a million dollars is not a lot of money.”

<...>

In fact, as Daniel Gross pointed out, “$250,000 puts you in pretty fancy company, especially after the collective pratfall the economy took in 2008″:

The Census Bureau last summer reported that real median household income was $50,303 in 2008, down 3.6 percent from 2007. It’s likely that figure fell further in 2009. So a household that’s making $250,000 today is making about five times the median…And even if you look at the wealthiest metropolitan areas — Washington ($85,236), San Francisco ($76,068), Boston ($70,334), and New York ($63,957) — a quarter of a million dollars a year dwarfs the median income.

Less than 2 percent of the country makes more than $250,000, and you literally need to begin looking at individual neighborhoods to find parts of the country where that much money is not going to cut it.

The point here is not to demonize the rich, but to note that, in a time of economic hardship and worrying long-term deficits, we have to look at raising revenue from somewhere, and letting the Bush tax cuts expire for the very wealthiest makes sense. In fact, as the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found, allowing these cuts to expire “will avert $826 billion in added deficits and debt over the next ten years.”

more

Disgusting!

et al, I think that is the specific group they are referencing.

families who live on $40k?

Shouldn't that statement make them at least sympathetic for those making less than $250K? But it doesn't.

I hope he is primaried so we can get a real Dem into that seat.

As far as Martha MacCallum and Karin Chetry, both make well over that so they are just speaking in self interest.

that will be the last straw for me. This is one campaign promise that needs to be seen through. If they back down on that I will know that all hope is lost.

needs to move his ends, as most of the rest of us have had to do.

especially when we're only talking about raising taxes BY A FEW PERCENT ON THE AMOUNT OVER $250,000.

so they get to earn the first $250,000 at the same old tax rates.
and that's $250,000 of adjusted gross income (not total earnings), so they get to keep all their deductions and exemptions as well.

IF YOUR AGI IS $250,000, you pay ZERO in extra taxes.

it's ONLY THE EXCESS that gets a taxed at a higher rate.

so if your AGI is $350,000, only that extra $100,000 will get a higher tax rate. your marginal tax rate would go from 33% to 36%, i.e., you pay an extra 3% ON THE EXTRA $100,000, which works out to a measly $3,000.

so all this hyperventilating is about people earning $250,000 paying ZERO in extra taxes (a zero percent tax increase).
and people earning $350,000 paying an extra $3,000 in extra taxes (less than a 1% average tax increase)

now, people making GAZILLIONS, like bill gates, who pays most of his income at the top tax rate, will see his taxes go from 35% to 39.6%. now that's only on the excess, but since so much of his money is in that highest bracket, i'll just simplify and pretend that ALL his income is taxed at 39.6%.

so bill gates' taxes go up a whopping 4.9%.

SERIOUSLY??? THAT'S IT???

even in the worst case scenario, the increase on bill gates isn't even 5% of his adjusted gross income.

i think it's a political mistake to get into classifying people at certain incomes as "rich" or not, but certainly SOMEONE has to start to pay down the debt and people at these income levels can certainly afford the TINY extra amounts we're talking about.

until someone wants to talk about raising tax rates above the 50% mark for ordinary people, no one has any fair basis to complain about not being able to afford it.

I say this as someone who earns 15,000 a year serving the disabled 3-5 yr olds in my community .
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

And don't get me started on yacht docking fees and country club dues.

in fur coats with only 250K/year, hmmmm?

Hey. $250,000 IS low - for an Arab oilman. With the pukes complicity with the Saudis	T Wolf	Feb-08-10 04:45 PM	#1
So if they think 250K is barely making ends meet, what do they think of	Sanity Claws	Feb-08-10 04:45 PM	#2
McMahon is my congressman and a total sellout.	JamesA1102	Feb-08-10 04:45 PM	#3
If Congress & The Dems Renege On Letting These Tax Cuts Expire......	global1	Feb-08-10 04:53 PM	#4
Perhaps Rep. McMahon	Lindsay	Feb-08-10 04:55 PM	#5
Always staying classy, i see. nt	brand404	Feb-08-10 05:05 PM	#6
$250,000 is as much money money as it seems, BUT THAT DOESN"T MEAN THEY CAN'T AFFORD MORE IN TAXES	unblock	Feb-08-10 05:41 PM	#7
oh cry me a frickin river	proud patriot	Feb-08-10 05:48 PM	#8
Bless his greedy little Orwellian heart(?).	Cha	Feb-08-10 05:51 PM	#9
True. It's nearly impossible to keep a full time chaffeur on 250K a year.	tanyev	Feb-08-10 06:33 PM	#10
Time to rethink your budget.	NC_Nurse	Feb-08-10 08:13 PM	#11
How's a man supposed to keep high-class prostitutes	Arkana	Feb-08-10 08:36 PM	#12