>
If anything you are arguing AGAINST the rising disparity by asserting that the middle class has the MORAL RIGHT to retain its earnings. That's the point: the middle class is the primary victim of this disparity. >
>Yup, the middle class is the primary victim - the Obama plan increases taxes on families with gross income greater than $250,000.
>
>In many families, $250,000 gross income is certainly nice but is not rich. In the last twelve months, I've made close to 2....certainly nice, but I have a family and an extended family to take care of. So I am not "rich" - and my gripe is with the government and their actions, not with those who are "richer".
That's "upper middle class"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Upper_middle_classAmerican upper middle class consists, strictly in an income sense, of professionals with personal incomes in excess of $62,500, who commonly reside in households with six figure incomes. The difference between personal and household income can be explained by considering that 76% of households with incomes exceeding $90,000 (the top 20%) had two or more income earners.
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*
010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"