Romney out of touch...thinks middle income is $200,000 - $250,000 per year

reply to post by FlyersFan


Sure did! You're being ridiculous. Maybe instead of sending your children to private schools for god knows how much a year, they can attend a public school like any other FRUGAL family. Maybe instead of buying that brand new BMW, you get a 5 year old Ford something or other.

Or hey ... maybe MOVE out of LA? Into a suburb? Complaining about making 200k is absolutely ridiculous. You're doing something wrong, and I'd suggest you see an accountant for financial help.

He said 200-250 and under. You know for someone who supposedly is unqualified to be president at face value (Romney) people sure do have to twist his words an awful lot to convince others how bad he is.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Ryanssuperman

 

How old are you Ryan?

I am 26.

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


You clearly know NOTHING about most of the Los Angeles public schools, LoL...

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


You are not accounting for inflation. It would cost significantly more to do the same thing now. You also do not live in the United States and so we are not making an accurate comparison. Do you have any idea what the costs of healthcare is for a family here in the US?

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Ryanssuperman

 

You clearly know NOTHING about most of the Los Angeles public schools, LoL...

God forbid they aren't spoon fed. Most of us have grown up in difficult environments, its part of life. Unless its a school with shootings and stabbings and rampant bullying ... a child will do just fine in a public school. I know there are some really bad schools out there, and I wouldn't want my children going as well ... but I'd never resort to privatized schooling if I was "just getting by".

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


Shootings, gangs, drugs, stabbings...try getting a decent teacher to work there. Budget crisis too... really do some research before you assume it is a frivolity. Obama's daughters don't attend DC public schools for the exact same reason.

Many families of meager means attend the Catholic schools in LA, and the schools offer them help (often cover the full amount) because they are charitable.

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Ryanssuperman

 

You are not accounting for inflation. It would cost significantly more to do the same thing now. You also do not live in the United States and so we are not making an accurate comparison. Do you have any idea what the costs of healthcare are for a family here in the US?

I do. Around 20k/year. I just checked a payroll calc for LA, assuming you make 200k. Your net income per month is 10k. Thats 120k left for the year, after taxes. Minus the average 20k for health care, you're left with 100k, or half your salary. Thats double what my family of 4 lived on my whole life.

Also, I checked the cost of living for Toronto compared to LA, and Toronto is higher.

I hope this is last thing I have to say on the matter.

Everyone knows Obama raised the amount from 100K to 250K because too many people on the right were but hurt over it and the right still screamed about it after he raised it to 250K. I think it is pretty clear Romney indicated only a 50K gap between what he considered middle wage and he was talking about a single individuals.
At the very least he said outright 100K is not middle income so there is a huge difference in what the two are saying.

IMO Romney only said 250K because he knows that is where Obama set the limit for taxes but he obviously does not have a clue where I believe at least Obama does or he wouldn’t have started at 100K in the beginning.

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
You had me until you mentioned a private school. Please.

Please? Sure .. here you go....

1 - ALL the information I posted is accurate. A family of 4 can't live 'comfortably' on what is left after taxes on $100,000 in Los Angeles. Look at the taxes. Look at the cost of housing. Look at the cost of gas and food and healthcare and clothing and diapers and formula and etc etc Even without a non-public school, a family of 4 can't 'live comfortably' in Los Angeles with $100,000 income.

2 - I said IF a neighborhood school is not safe then a non-public school is needed . And yes .. some of them are not. Obviously you aren't a parent so you don't 'get it'.

That's why charter schools are so popular in Los Angeles 200 of them in Los Angeles alone. Some neighborhoods are so bad that the schools have to post "safe routes to schools" .

A very bad week for Los Angeles public schools
LA Times - Gangs in LA Schools
ABC News - School in middle of gangs - Los Angeles

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Ryanssuperman

 

Shootings, gangs, drugs, stabbings...try getting a decent teacher to work there. Budget crisis too... really do some research before you assume it is a frivolity. Obama's daughters don't attend DC public schools for the exact same reason.

I said I wouldn't send my children to a school with that violence. But there are other schools. There are other places to live in Cali, near LA. I'm sure there's some decent public schools there where you dont fear for your childrens safety. I'm just saying ... be frugal. If a family over in Africa can survive on $5/day ... you can survive on 100k after taxes.

I've noticed the payroll calculator I'm using for Cali is deducting for "Medicare". Is that your health insurance? Or is it a separate payment after medicare?

reply to post by Ryanssuperman


It can take over an hour to drive 5 miles in many parts of LA. Getting a job in CA is a feat right now. Really you don't understand.

You SERIOUSLY need to learn how to read. :shk:

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
You're being ridiculous.

I'm being ACCURATE. Learn some basic economics.
$100,000 salary in Los Angeles for a family of four will not get that family 'living comfortably'

Maybe instead of sending your children to private schools for god knows how much a year, they can attend a public school like any other FRUGAL family.

1 - Maybe you should understand that we aren't talking about me, but a FICTIONAL family.
2 - If a family with 2 children live in gang infested neighborhoods in LA .. and there are plenty of them .. then for the safety of their children they will want to send them to a non-public school. It has nothing to do with being 'FRUGAL'. It has to do with the safety of children. Something you obviously aren't old enough to understand.

Maybe instead of buying that brand new BMW, you get a 5 year old Ford something or other.

1 - Grow up. I have a 10 year old Honda.

2 - We are discussing a FICTIONAL 4 person family living in Los Angeles.

3 - A fictional 4 person family living in Los Angeles .. with all the costs of Los Angeles .. with an income of $100,000 would not be able to afford a 'brand new BMW'.

Or hey ... maybe MOVE out of LA? Into a suburb?

Or hey .. maybe you should realize we are talking about people who live in Los Angeles and the cost of living there. So if you say that someone should move out of Los Angeles because they can't afford to live there ... with a family of four .. with a $100,000 income .. THEN YOU JUST PROVED MY POINT.

Complaining about making 200k is absolutely ridiculous.

We aren't talking about $200,000. We are talking about $100,000 IN THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES.
(and I don't live there .. this is a FICTIONAL family) Try to keep up with the conversation ...

You're doing something wrong, and I'd suggest you see an accountant for financial help.

I suggest you go back and re-read the thread before you post anything else.

Originally posted by Grimpachi
I hope this is last thing I have to say on the matter.

Everyone knows Obama raised the amount from 100K to 250K because too many people on the right were but hurt over it and the right still screamed about it after he raised it to 250K. I think it is pretty clear Romney indicated only a 50K gap between what he considered middle wage and he was talking about a single individuals.
At the very least he said outright 100K is not middle income so there is a huge difference in what the two are saying.

IMO Romney only said 250K because he knows that is where Obama set the limit for taxes but he obviously does not have a clue where I believe at least Obama does or he wouldn’t have started at 100K in the beginning.

edit on 15-9-2012 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)

When President Mitt Romney is elected then we will probably just go to a flat tax.

Remember the Herman Cain 9 - 9 - 9 ?

It's so simple. Everybody can understand it.

How many people understand the current tax code?

reply to post by FlyersFan


California ?!

Move to Flagstaff, Arizona and recalculate everything.

or

Austin, Texas.....state taxes?

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by Ryanssuperman

 

You clearly know NOTHING about most of the Los Angeles public schools, LoL...

God forbid they aren't spoon fed. Most of us have grown up in difficult environments, its part of life. Unless its a school with shootings and stabbings and rampant bullying ... .

That is exactly what is in many of the Los Angeles public schools... gangs and shootings and stabbings and drugs and WORSE than bullying. So get with the program and actually learn something about the subject before you speak.

ETA - Your comment about people wanting their children to be safe are just 'spoon feeding' them is childish. You don't understand the situation in the cities. You don't understand finances. You don't understand what it's like to be a parent and to care about a child.

Originally posted by Ryanssuperman
If a family over in Africa can survive on $5/day ... you can survive on 100k after taxes.

You really didn't just say that .. did you? Is that the wonderful stuff they teach you in those 'free' Canadian schools? That's just silly. A SEVERE lack of understanding of world economics and financial matters.

Once again a distraction from the real question..........

Why does BO and his admin think that 200k + is part of the 1%?

reply to post by sensfan


Im not sure your point democrats and republicans have consistently said the middle class is 250000 and below.This is why the Obama administration keeps excluding families making 250000 from there talk on tax increases.

Here this is straight off Obama's campaign website.

President Obama has cut taxes for middle-class families and small businesses. One of the first things he did in office was cut taxes for 95 percent of working families. He has also signed 18 tax cuts for small businesses and extended the payroll tax cut for all American workers and their families, putting an extra $1,000 in the typical middle-class family’s pocket.

For too long, the U.S. tax code has benefited the wealthy and well-connected at the expense of the vast majority of Americans. That's why President Obama proposed the Buffett Rule, asking millionaires and billionaires to do their fair share. But if you're one of the 98 percent of American families who make under $250,000 a year, your taxes won’t go up.

So your trying to make a big deal out of something thats been well established through out this election cycle???

reply to post by Grimpachi


Yes Romney has a Master's Degree in Business from Harvard and a Business Law degree from Harvard, but he doesn't have a clue.

Honestly you are completely twisting what Romney said to fit your own agenda. I think most of us here who have already debunked the entire premise of this thread (title included) hope that this is the last thing you have to say about this as well.