Here comes the middle-class tax hike

[Horace]

But we can all take comfort in the fact that policy has no effect on the economy or any individual's stake in that economy. Never has, never will. None of this matters because none of this matters. Just look at history, look at the economies during Democrat and Republican administrations. Policy is a non-factor, full stop. QED.

Given that, I'm not sure why we don't just raise the tax rate to 90%. It won't have any meaningful effect on anybody or anything, but the government would have way more money to spend on stuff. I see no drawbacks there.

[Jolly]

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

But we can all take comfort in the fact that policy has no effect on the economy or any individual's stake in that economy. Never has, never will. None of this matters because none of this matters. Just look at history, look at the economies during Democrat and Republican administrations. Policy is a non-factor, full stop. QED.

Given that, I'm not sure why we don't just raise the tax rate to 90%. It won't have any meaningful effect on anybody or anything, but the government would have way more money to spend on stuff. I see no drawbacks there.

Sic 'em, Phideaux!

Sounds like perfect new logic to me...Life in the times of Carter II, the FDR-wannabe edition...

[Axtremus]

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

... I'm not sure why we don't just raise the tax rate to 90%.

We did:
“In 1944, the top rate peaked at 94 percent on taxable income over $200,000 ... Over the next three decades, the top federal income tax rate remained high, never dipping below 70 percent.“

The country did great and sent quite a few Americans to the moon in that period.

[Horace]

@axtremus said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

The country did great and sent quite a few Americans to the moon in that period.

Fact check: fewer than 1% of Americans ever went to the moon during that period.

[Jolly]

Fact check: The median family income in 1944 was less than $3000.

[George K]

@jolly said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

Fact check: The median family income in 1944 was less than $3000.

Today's median family income is $79,900.

https://www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/il/il21/Medians2021.pdf

[Mik]

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

[Horace]

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I think through a middle class person's financial outlook for retirement, if they work a job with no pension, raise a family, and save reasonably. Good luck with that unless the stock market is high performing.

And what's the statistic again, more than 50% of Americans have essentially no savings?

[Doctor Phibes]

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I am so much better off than my parents were, it's ridiculous. And they did fine.

[Horace]

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I am so much better off than my parents were, it's ridiculous.

What does that mean? Presumably you're not talking about having iPhones while they did not.

I thought it was widely agreed on that the days of a one-income family being comfortable owning a home, raising a family, and retiring at 60, are gone. That was our parents' generation.

[Doctor Phibes]

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I am so much better off than my parents were, it's ridiculous.

What does that mean? Presumably you're not talking about having iPhones while they did not.

I thought it was widely agreed on that the days of a one-income family being comfortable owning a home, raising a family, and retiring at 60, are gone. That was our parents' generation.

It wasn't agreed by me. We live in a very small house by American standards, but my wife doesn't work. I can probably retire at 62 if I want to. Admittedly, we live pretty conservatively, compared to a lot of people I know.

Not American conservatively, obviously. Those guys have gold toilets and spray-tans.

[Mik]

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I think through a middle class person's financial outlook for retirement, if they work a job with no pension, raise a family, and save reasonably. Good luck with that unless the stock market is high performing.

And what's the statistic again, more than 50% of Americans have essentially no savings?

Is that a result of low income or of poor budgeting and spending habits? Possibly a combination of both, a drawback of the consumer economy.

Our retirement savings are mostly in the same investments they were in when they were called pensions. They are just not managed nor guaranteed by the corporations. But they were always in securities of one sort or another.

In the so called Golden Age of the American worker my uncle worked in a machine shop with no pension all his life. That can still happen today. But it doesn't have to.

[Axtremus]

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I can probably retire at 62 if I want to.

Does that depend on being able to go back to Canada for healthcare?

[Mik]

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I am so much better off than my parents were, it's ridiculous.

What does that mean? Presumably you're not talking about having iPhones while they did not.

I thought it was widely agreed on that the days of a one-income family being comfortable owning a home, raising a family, and retiring at 60, are gone. That was our parents' generation.

I never knew many people who retired at 60.

[Horace]

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@horace said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

I keep hearing about the destruction of the middle class even as I see the middle class living a far better life than when I was a kid.

I am so much better off than my parents were, it's ridiculous.

What does that mean? Presumably you're not talking about having iPhones while they did not.

I thought it was widely agreed on that the days of a one-income family being comfortable owning a home, raising a family, and retiring at 60, are gone. That was our parents' generation.

It wasn't agreed by me. We live in a very small house by American standards, but my wife doesn't work. I can probably retire at 62 if I want to.

Do you have a pension? I exclude people with pensions from consideration about retirement concerns, or really any big financial concerns. But the fact that the vast majority of private sector workers don't have a pension allows me to do that while still speaking in generalities.

I am a secondary beneficiary of pensions, in that my dad had one, which has now transferred to my mom. They raised a middle class family, and retired at 60. But to the extent they ever built any wealth, that all happened in retirement, with the pension as income, funneled into the stock market.

[Doctor Phibes]

Yes, I've got a pension, plus a 401K. I know, I'm very lucky regarding the pension, although I chose my employer based on my own cautious outlook to money.

Anybody who can't afford to put money into a 401K isn't really middle-class as I understand the term, and if they can afford to but aren't doing so, then they've really only got themselves to blame.

[Mik]

Today's pensions are not what they used to be either. We had three between us, two of which we cashed in for self-managed investments. We could have gone for the annuity, but that is an illusion too. If the market were to go that bust you're not getting your money anyway.

[Horace]

@doctor-phibes said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

Anybody who can't afford to put money into a 401K isn't really middle-class as I understand the term, and if they can afford to but aren't doing so, then they've really only got themselves to blame.

"Putting money in a 401k" is a far cry from a pension.

[Horace]

@mik said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

Today's pensions are not what they used to be either.

Yes, this is another generational difference, and not in favor of younger generations.

[jon-nyc]

@george-k said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

@jolly said in Here comes the middle-class tax hike:

Fact check: The median family income in 1944 was less than $3000.

Today's median family income is $79,900.

I’m guessing the median family income comes from something close to 2 earners whereas in 1944 it was something close to 1.