It's not easy being rich these days.Read the whole thing at the link.
Just ask the rich.
In a survey released this month, Fidelity Investments asked more than 1,000 customers with investment accounts of at least $1 million how they were feeling about their money.
The predictable answer? Not so good.
Nearly half of this group said they don't "feel wealthy," despite average incomes of $300,000 and nest eggs averaging $3 million-plus. That's double the number who answered the same way a year ago.
Well, millionaires, President Barack Obama won't be throwing any pity parties for you.
In fact, as the costs mount for the economic rescue plan, it's becoming increasingly clear who will be paying a greater share as a result. From reining in executive pay to taxing the foreign profits of U.S. companies, the Obama administration is taking aim at the wealthiest segments of society.
This year could turn out to be an inflection point akin to the ascendancy of Ronald Reagan in the early 1980s, which kicked off a long run of disproportionate gains at the very top of the economic food chain.
Related: Glenn Reynolds, "Tax Audits Are No Laughing Matter." And Roy Edroso's response, "More Obama Inappropriate Laughism!." (Both, via Memeorandum).
Image Credit: Westside Republicans.
4 comments:
I live in an upper-middle class neighborhood which went heavily for Obama. Incomes range from $100K to $500K. Denial seems to be the watchword when it comes to Obama's tax plans. The people at the upper end of the scale (not me!) are the worst, they rationalize any tax increase away as "just a few bucks a year".
There's also a great deal of "blame Bush" going around, as in folks who say "what do you expect when Bush ran up such high deficits". Facts, like pointing out that Obama is quadrupling the deficit, don't impinge on their ignorance. One common refrain goes "he has to borrow more now to pay off Bush's debts". Nobody with even a modicum of basic math skills could ever believe that.
So I think April 2011 is going to be a very interesting month. The Bush tax cuts expire in 2010 so the bill will come due on 4/15/11. There are going to be a lot of very unhappy people returning to the "reality based universe" when that day comes.
I am digging, searching really hard here...
but I cant seem to muster an oz. of sympathy
for the rich....
(I mean not even those with only a 3 MILLION dollar nest egg).
I know, I know, call me a RINO "lefty" socialist.....thingy
(Its my own fault I got laid off (sniff))
You cannot ever really soak the rich for they have the wherewithal to change how their income is stated and where they reside. You will see a large exodus to non tax or low tax states and a movement of businesses to those states. One can already see the movement occurring from states like New York and California. I would not be surprised to see a lot of money move outside the US.
You would think that Congress would be well versed in what happens when you do things like this. They were going to punish the rich by raising the tax on ownership of yachts. That only drove the money to foreign made yachts, which were kept in foreign harbors, and just about killed the yacht building business in and around the east coast among other places.
I can always find sympathy for those who work hard and earn what they make being robbed by those who are to lazy or incompetent to even steal from others on their own. Theft of other people' earnings NEVER stops at the so called rich because the definition of rich keeps being lowered to include anyone who actually works for a living and to those who would steal from others there is never enough money to meet the demands of their grandiose schemes. Three million dollars in some state and cities in this country is not what some would think of rich, maybe well off. Picking a number and calling those who meet those qualifications show a decide lack of understanding of the economies of various parts of this country. As Chris so amply demonstrates in his comments about his neighborhood. And this attitude is usually held by those too lazy or jealous of those who went out and prepared themselves to succeed or those who lose their jobs because they did not upgrade their skills or have an ideology which is an anathema to their own well being.
I am not sure how, pandering to AIG, Goldman Sax and other corporate entities with billions of dollars in tax payer "gifts", is in anyway considered "socialist", but of course, some can make a strawman argument out of nothing.
How many of Obamas' admin come from ex goldman sax entities?
Some of you folk neeed a serious lesson on political theory 101.
Maybe you're on to something here?
We can call it a neo-socialism for the rich, which is based on pandering to corporate interests.
Post a Comment