The Obama administration’s definition of who is rich is peculiar. It bandies about an annual figure of $250,000. Sounds like a lot, which is not. If you live in New York City you can cut about half of it for your net, before contemplating an enormous cost-of-living hurdle to overcome.
But that argument for taxation is primarily based on outmoded figures, when families depended on only one of its members working. They may have been the norm twenty years ago. Today, women have careers, especially after their children are grown, when both husband and wife, and sometimes single youngsters add to household income.
Family total income may reach what this administration calls “rich” and get taxed accordingly, only when you add up a total of very modest earnings. These individuals are not after-tax “rich” by any definition.
No comments:
Post a Comment