>>>>>No kidding today on my way to lunch I passed a homeless guy with a sign that read 'Vote Obama, I need the money.' I laughed.
>>>>>I got into the restaurant and again no kidding my server had on a 'Obama 08' tie, again I laughed as he had given away his political preference--just imagine the coincidence.
>>>>>When the bill came I decided not to tip the server and explained to him that I was exploring the Obama redistribution of wealth concept. He stood there in
>>>>>disbelief while I told him that I was going to redistribute his tip to someone who I deemed more in need--the homeless guy outside. The server angrily stormed from my sight.
>>>>>I went outside, gave the homeless guy $10 and told him to thank the server inside as I 've decided he could use the money more. The homeless guy was grateful.
>>>>>At the end of my rather unscientific redistribution experiment I realized the homeless guy was grateful for the money he did not earn, but the waiter was pretty angry that I gave away the money he did earn even though the actual recipient needed money more.
>>>>>I guess redistribution of wealth is an easier thing to swallow in concept than in practical application.
>>>>>
>>>>>You might try this experiment yourself
>>>>
>>>>Is there any information on how much more people over the magic number will be taxed?
>>>
>>>It depends entirely on Reps preserving filibuster-enabled votes in the Senate. The most vulnerable point is SS taxes: if cap is removed that anyone making more than 100K will be liable for 6.2% on excess amount for W2 filers, or 12.4% for independents. The next target will be capital gain taxes, that may increase from 15% to pre-Bush marginal rates, i.e. 36% for the people in question. Income tax increase that could come in 2010 may add couple more points (about 4-5% based on full earnings).
>>
>>It might help paying off the huge deficit Bush has built up. Lets face it the rich have had good times for a few years and now you have to pay the tab
>
>The last stated income level was 100,000. Let's assume that for now just for discussion sake. What is the exchange rate in British sterling? Approximately 63,000/yr, correct? Does a family with 63,000 annual income fall into the 'rich' category in your country?

It might happen that I am not quite familiar with media issues (frankly, I don't follow them much), but it seems to me (maybe it is wrong assumption, so I apologize in advance) that media did not even ask O.MG simple question: is this imaginary border (250K, 150K etc.) for family or individual income? Every tax accountant (or even elementary school grader) will tell that the difference is about 2 times, i.e. if 200K family called 'rich' then 100K individual is also 'rich' with all tax consequences.