Support NeoGAF

[commedieu]

You guys think this is rage inducing? You should check out the Rich kid tmblr, some of these people have fucking lion cubs as pets. I wish I was joking.

The rage comes from people paying a fair share, who are wealthier than the rest of the country, crying about it.

 

[Funky Papa]

This article has some ideas! Here are my favorites:

Ha, I remember that article, we had a thread about it. My e-rage was quite severe.

 

[radios shipping overview]

So your problem with the piece is that the figures aren't smiling? It's not like they deviously hid their incomes or anything. Your problem is that it's the "main image"? How little is the WSJ to expect of its article readers?

The infographic goes out of its way to show what appears to be a variety of earners, even though they're all comfortably well-off and well-invested. Then it makes them look as put-upon as if they'd been told they'd lost their entire life savings.

It's possible that it's just a misguided attempt to appeal to regular WSJ readers - i.e. people who are well-off and well-invested. Such people probably do feel like they're regular people. (Just look at the articles about people with $500k/year salaries who were forced to make sacrifices after their bonuses were trimmed due to the recession.) The article may be informative, but the infographic is an appeal to emotion that undermines the whole thing.

 

[WickedCobra03]

I get there are going to be rich people, and I am not saying rich as far as making 125k a year, I am saying those people that make over 750k and basically are doing everything in their power to keep themselves rich and the rest of the country poor.

 

[Gr1mLock]

No way thats not an onion article. No fucking way.

 

[ShutEye]

This article has some ideas! Here are my favorites:

I know a couple people like that in Toronto. Uggh.

 

[entremet]

You'd have to be a partner to make 600k as an attorney.

That's what I mean Wasn't taking about an entry level law school grad.

 

[BobTheFork]

Hey, that's all the money they were going to tip people this year. We're fucked.

 

[pigeon]

Amazing that you'd focus on that rather than the huge tax increases they're facing.

Why would that be a problem? We just had a whole election that centered largely on whether THESE EXACT PEOPLE should pay more in taxes, and the answer was yes, they should. They should take this whole article and reprint it in Mother Jones under the headline "Look, Democracy Works!"

 

[DrSlek]

Why does the retired couple look so depressed?

 

[Guileless]

Ironically, most of these new income taxes will be paid by coastal Blue State professionals who mostly voted for Pres. Obama. Some of yall have every bit as cartoonish and simplistic a view of complex subjects as the stereotypical Fox News viewer.

 

[Kinitari]

Ha, I remember that article, we had a thread about it. My e-rage was quite severe.

I did the math right I think, but it doesn't make sense.the first single gut still has 65k a year after all his expenses.

 

[KingGondo]

Why does the retired couple look so depressed?

Living in Obama's America is hard work.

 

[commedieu]

Ironically, most of these new income taxes will be paid by coastal Blue State professionals who mostly voted for Pres. Obama. Some of yall have every bit as cartoonish and simplistic a view of complex subjects as the stereotypical Fox News viewer.

I make a lot of money. I'm fine with this, as its what is fair. + I'm in california.

No more "fuck you, i've got mine" mentality in my country. Screwing over everyone to get to the top has got us exactly no where.

Its not a punishment to pay taxes.

 

[pigeon]

Ironically, most of these new income taxes will be paid by coastal Blue State professionals who mostly voted for Pres. Obama. Some of yall have every bit as cartoonish and simplistic a view of complex subjects as the stereotypical Fox News viewer.

This is a pretty ironic post. Believe it or not, the liberal viewpoint is not that conservatives should pay more taxes because they lost and we hate them, it's that richer people in general should pay more taxes so that we can all have more services. The idea that somehow liberals would be offended or surprised because the professionals who are likely to pay more live in liberal states is...well, it's a little cartoonish and simplistic, to be honest.

 

[spandexmonkey]

So is the WSJ saying that these are what poor/middle class incomes should actually be? Stealth advocacy for wage increases?

 

[onadesertedisland]

The idea is also that rich people benefit more from the most expensive services provided by the government.

 

[speculawyer]

I am not sure I understand the outrage at explaining how peoples taxation rates will change.

Really? It is not outrage but more shaking heads in how out of touch they are.

The poorest people on that list are making more than THREE TIMES the median household income and they are retired. And all the people are drawn so sad. Woe is them . . . those people making 3 to 12 times the median income are going to have to pay a little more.

Right now someone is having their home foreclosed on and someone else is filing for bankruptcy due to an illness.

 

[Jado]

You'd have to be a partner to make 600k as an attorney.

Nope. Partners in big law make 2mil+. Counsel make 500k+.

 

[Guileless]

This is a pretty ironic post. Believe it or not, the liberal viewpoint is not that conservatives should pay more taxes because they lost and we hate them, it's that richer people in general should pay more taxes so that we can all have more services. The idea that somehow liberals would be offended or surprised because the professionals who are likely to pay more live in liberal states is...well, it's a little cartoonish and simplistic, to be honest.

Have you read this thread? A personal finance column (not news or editorial) about tax policy changes for for high earners has produced 5 pages of responses by people who haven't read it commenting on it apparently based solely on the artist drawings, including one who references a class war. There doing the same thing in reverse on some conservative forum.

 

[Dynamic3]

I make a lot of money. I'm fine with this, as its what is fair. + I'm in california.

No more "fuck you, i've got mine" mentality in my country. Screwing over everyone to get to the top has got us exactly no where.

Its not a punishment to pay taxes.

Why do you have this idea that everyone who makes more than you has this "fuck you" mentality? Further, who are you to declare what is fair?

 

[Agent_J]

only in america would you see a writer complaining about "only" making a quarter million dollars a year. reminds me of a CEO a few years back that wrote about how difficult it is to live on "only" $500K a year.

yeah, "only".

this is what I don't like about capitalism.
taxes should be set on some sort of sliding scale, but nothing extreme for anybody. small percent for the poor, slightly higher for the middle class, and even higher for the rich. should be so simple.

 

[NathanMcMahon]

A retired couple making $180K/year? Obama must be taxing alternate dimensions, too.

My dad's retired and makes about that off of his pension

 

[WanderingWind]

Why do you have this idea that everyone who makes more than you has this "fuck you" mentality? Further, who are you to declare what is fair?

A) History, experience and paying attention to verbiage used to comment on articles like this It's a "punishment" to have to pay taxes.

B) A fellow taxpayer? A citizen of the country? A person with an opinion?

 

[fallagin]

Even one dollar tax increase is too much!!

 

[pigeon]

Have you read this thread? A personal finance column (not news or editorial) about tax policy changes for for high earners has produced 5 pages of responses by people who haven't read it commenting on it apparently nased aolely on the artist drawings, including one who references a class war.

...so? How does that relate at all to what you posted earlier about blue-state professionals paying the taxes? It's a bizarre and perhaps deceptive drawing, and people commented on that. Doesn't seem unreasonable. Also, wtf five pages.

 

[Dynamic3]

only in america would you see a writer complaining about "only" making a quarter million dollars a year. reminds me of a CEO a few years back that wrote about how difficult it is to live on "only" $500K a year.

yeah, "only".

this is what I don't like about capitalism.

Only in GAF OT would someone complain about an author complaining about only making 500K who never complained about only making 500K, because he chose to read one sentence from the op instead of reading the article himself.

Thank you for gracing us with your opinion of capitalism though.

 

[Concept17]

I would do many naughty, naughty things to make 180k a year.

Dark, naughty things.

 

[Bulbo Urethral Baggins]

Why would that be a problem? We just had a whole election that centered largely on whether THESE EXACT PEOPLE should pay more in taxes, and the answer was yes, they should. They should take this whole article and reprint it in Mother Jones under the headline "Look, Democracy Works!"

Then nobody would read it.

 

[Agent_J]

Only in GAF OT would someone complain about an author complaining about only making 500K who never complained about only making 500K, because he chose to read one sentence from the op instead of reading the article himself.

Thank you for gracing us with your opinion of capitalism though.

thank you for caring so much about my opinion that you took up to time to write a lame, sarcastic response. fyi, these message boards are created to share opinions, not for everyone to agree with you.

 

[pigeon]

Then nobody would read it.

I already said "in Mother Jones."

 

[RukusProvider]

Drawing aside, the article is good with the numbers presented. I avoided any color commentary.

As for 250k being mega rich.

Generally to make the high income you generally put a lot of hours in.

Time is really limited and you generally want to live in a nice area

Then you have things like gardener, house cleaner, pool cleaner, etc so what time you do have left over after work can be for family and hobbies.

You likely own a home is a good area which is more expensive and probably don't want to drive a beater.

Ofcourse you can be wasteful with money at 50k, 250k, 500k but depending on where you live and what you have to do in order to get that 250k can really vary in it's usage.

 

[gcubed]

...so? How does that relate at all to what you posted earlier about blue-state professionals paying the taxes? It's a bizarre and perhaps deceptive drawing, and people commented on that. Doesn't seem unreasonable. Also, wtf five pages.

damn liberals and your 100 post pages

 

[WanderingWind]

No, 250k is well off, no matter how many gardeners you want to throw into the equation.

 

[radios shipping overview]

Drawing aside, the article is good with the numbers presented. I avoided any color commentary.

As for 250k being mega rich.

Generally to make the high income you generally put a lot of hours in.

Time is really limited and you generally want to live in a nice area

Then you have things like gardener, house cleaner, pool cleaner, etc so what time you do have left over after work can be for family and hobbies.

You likely own a home is a good area which is more expensive and probably don't want to drive a beater.

Ofcourse you can be wasteful with money at 50k, 250k, 500k but depending on where you live and what you have to do in order to get that 250k can really vary in it's usage.

In other words, you can tap out your resources keeping up with your peers at any income level.

 

[DarkFlow]

I don't know how that family of 4 is going to live with 500k after taxes. The horror!

 

[pigeon]

Drawing aside, the article is good with the numbers presented. I avoided any color commentary.

As for 250k being mega rich.

Generally to make the high income you generally put a lot of hours in.

Time is really limited and you generally want to live in a nice area

Then you have things like gardener, house cleaner, pool cleaner, etc so what time you do have left over after work can be for family and hobbies.

You likely own a home is a good area which is more expensive and probably don't want to drive a beater.

Ofcourse you can be wasteful with money at 50k, 250k, 500k but depending on where you live and what you have to do in order to get that 250k can really vary in it's usage.

You are literally describing the experience of being rich in America as though it is just the normal way of life. I get it, my parents were rich too. But I'm not. Here are some things ordinary people can't afford:

* to be selective about where they live
* to have help of any sort
* to have a garden large enough that a gardener would not laugh at you
* to have a pool
* to own a home
* to own a car with any positive characteristics other than running

You can maybe choose one of these, maybe, at the cost of some stress and austerity in other aspects of your life. (For example, we'd be better off financially if we moved to a cheaper neighborhood, but we want walkability and mass transit more than we want to go to the movies ever.) But if you have all of these you're extremely wealthy compared to the average American, who is generally happy just to be able to get to work on time. That's what wealth is -- comfort, ease, and attractive possessions.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

How do some of these people get to make so much money, I know a lot of people that have busted their asses studying and working who cant even aspire to ever make that much money, damn, they make it look easy.

and I know lots of lawyers that did work hard and put in lots of hours.

I wondered myself until I started meeting these people. Most aren't exceptional, brilliant, entrepreneurial, or hard-working. The truth in many cases? Legacy. Where your daddy went to school and where you, in turn, will end up going to school and be surrounded with opportunities to be successful and comfortable. If you're not a total fuckup in everything and can do decent work, you can coast through just fine at a good private school that will feed you a waiting seat at an Ivy and set you up with high-paying work for life.

Besides that, just having high grades stuff like in law or finance, but not at a mediocre school where top firms won't even look at you -- even with a very high GPA.

oh that's not true. that's a broad stroke based on anecdotes.

How much do u make a year?

if you don't know bulbo's shtick by now....

The drawings are silly but I still find it crazy for people to equate a couple making $250k a year or a single person making 200k a year to be the equivalent of Donald Trump or Bill Gates. If you have kids or depending on where you're living, you're likely doing all right, but its lunacy to think you're in the same league as multi millionaires and billionaires.

exactly. and someone that's a first year attorney in a big Manhattan law firm has a METRIC TON of law school loans to pay back. plus the living expenses. and frankly, they may be taking care of not just themselves but who knows what other family. you can't just assume 250K= got it made. they are at a good spot in life, damn good but it isn't as clear cut. plus most of these affluent folk voted for Obama so I must assume they are okay with paying extra in taxes. I think.

Even with those huge tax increases they still live like kings compared to most people so fuck em.

*sigh*

 

[Himynameischris]

Images like this really make me feel like I'm failing at life.

Me and my Wife combine for ~$90k/yr and I dunno.. life seems pretty good. I guess according to this I should be hunkered down in an alley crying.

I make 27k a year....I might as well be dead

 

[commedieu]

Why do you have this idea that everyone who makes more than you has this "fuck you" mentality? Further, who are you to declare what is fair?

A) History, experience and paying attention to verbiage used to comment on articles like this It's a "punishment" to have to pay taxes.

B) A fellow taxpayer? A citizen of the country? A person with an opinion?

Thanks. Also, a voter

I see the mentality within my peers as well. I'm sick of everyone being so selfish. I agree with the likes of Warren Buffet who believes the same dynamic.

 

[JustProgress]

Jesus, the salt in this thread.

 

[evil solrac v3.0]

Nope. Partners in big law make 2mil+. Counsel make 500k+.

not all partners will make 2+ million. starting partners go for 1 million or a bit less. (but it varies by place of course) Senior Counsel would make 650K.

 

[CyclopsRock]

The infographic goes out of its way to show what appears to be a variety of earners, even though they're all comfortably well-off and well-invested. Then it makes them look as put-upon as if they'd been told they'd lost their entire life savings.

It's possible that it's just a misguided attempt to appeal to regular WSJ readers - i.e. people who are well-off and well-invested. Such people probably do feel like they're regular people. (Just look at the articles about people with $500k/year salaries who were forced to make sacrifices after their bonuses were trimmed due to the recession.) The article may be informative, but the infographic is an appeal to emotion that undermines the whole thing.

But it states clearly in the article that it's a cross section of well off people that are facing tax increases. If taken in isolation I can see why it could be confusing - which is perhaps why it appears confusing here, because the image was posted but literally none of the associated text - but if you see it in the context of the words, I don't see how anyone could leave with the wrong impression about the facts. Whether the characters are smiling or not does not a horrible piece of journalism make. I suspect that, were this the other way around (ie a piece showing how much damage the tax changes would have to all those groups in lower incomes) no one would give a shit. As it stands, you end up with people in this thread with their snarky, sarcastic comments like "oh no, how will they cope?!" when that's not the point the article is making at all. I don't see how the WSJ is to blame for people's ignorance here.

 

[CornBurrito]

Amazing that you'd focus on that rather than the huge tax increases they're facing.

Yeah like that poor single asian woman having to pay 1000 or so more dollars. JEEESUS HOW WILL SHE HANDLE THAT????

 

[WanderingWind]

Thanks. Also, a voter

I see the mentality within my peers as well. I'm sick of everyone being so selfish. I agree with the likes of Warren Buffet who believes the same dynamic.

I don't hate the rich. I hate the out-of-touch rich who can't understand how people are poor and for god's sake, why won't they just work harder?!

Buffett is an inspiring example. If I somehow make it rich, or even above the median in terms of income, I'd like to be like him. But, money does have a way of making people into assholes. Who knows.

 

[Dynamic3]

thank you for caring so much about my opinion that you took up to time to write a lame, sarcastic response. fyi, these message boards are created to share opinions, not for everyone to agree with you.

My post wasn't sarcastic. You made a false claim about the author. That's not an opinion.

When you pull shit out of your ass, people on these message boards, will call you out.

 

[McLovin]

Wow the poorest one was that retired black couple and I would be happy making 1/4 of their income.

 

[Dynamic3]

A) History, experience and paying attention to verbiage used to comment on articles like this It's a "punishment" to have to pay taxes.

B) A fellow taxpayer? A citizen of the country? A person with an opinion?

A) Please quote where the article alludes to paying taxes as punishment.

B) Taxes aren't fair. I pay taxes, am a citizen, and vote. Now what? My point is that there's a difference between a declarative statement and an opinion, especially when he was generalizing that all rich people have "fuck you" attitude to begin with.

 

[The Technomancer]

You are literally describing the experience of being rich in America as though it is just the normal way of life. I get it, my parents were rich too. But I'm not. Here are some things ordinary people can't afford:

* to be selective about where they live
* to have help of any sort
* to have a garden large enough that a gardener would not laugh at you
* to have a pool
* to own a home
* to own a car with any positive characteristics other than running

You can maybe choose one of these, maybe, at the cost of some stress and austerity in other aspects of your life. (For example, we'd be better off financially if we moved to a cheaper neighborhood, but we want walkability and mass transit more than we want to go to the movies ever.) But if you have all of these you're extremely wealthy compared to the average American, who is generally happy just to be able to get to work on time. That's what wealth is -- comfort, ease, and attractive possessions.

Yeah, even at 100k you manage...two of those, maybe three.

 

[senahorse]

Is there a donation link to help out these poor folk?