What has Obama done to help the middle class?

[TakeAStepBack]

2. The tax increases are twelve NOT ON THE MIDDLE CLASS as you clearly said they were in your post. Another lie by you. If you read your source, you would see that all have a minimum income requirement of between $250K and $450K.

And you think 250K isn't the middle class?



point back to the 1950s again. Hows that purchasing power going? Inflation?

You're horrible at this.

 

[Rshermr]

Yeah, yeah. The shoot the messenger fallacy. Now, me fucking retard, crawl back into your hole and dig. Dig like you've never dug before. Because there isn't any such thing as an "impartial link", me dear fuckin' retard.

I provided the information. You can display as many logical fallacies regarding it as you like. But there is nothing within that link that can not be verified elsewhere.

Me fuckin' retard.

You know better. No one needs to waste their time reading someone's drivel derived from a partisan source. And anyone who would suggest that they should, like you, is simply wasting people's time. I am not interested in trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. You avoid that by at least trying to provide a non partisan source. Most understand that. Sorry you do not.

So, apparently you just do not have a non partial source. Or maybe you just do not like them. Isn't it fun to just take info from agenda driven sites, expecially when those sites push the agenda you have??

In addition, you forgot to address the other points that I made. Like no middle class tax increases. And the whole payroll tax bullshit, me boy. You would think if it was something that cons like you felt should have been continued, then some conservative house member would have pushed for continuation of that tax decrease. But you see, dipshit, they did not. Because the cons love tax decreases for the wealthy. And only the wealthy.

 

[Politico]

I know he doubled their healthcare costs. Other than that nothing.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Yeah, yeah. The shoot the messenger fallacy. Now, me fucking retard, crawl back into your hole and dig. Dig like you've never dug before. Because there isn't any such thing as an "impartial link", me dear fuckin' retard.

I provided the information. You can display as many logical fallacies regarding it as you like. But there is nothing within that link that can not be verified elsewhere.

Me fuckin' retard.

You know better. No one needs to waste their time reading someone's drivel derived from a partisan source. And anyone who would suggest that they should, like you, is simply wasting people's time. I am not interested in trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. You avoid that by at least trying to provide a non partisan source. Most understand that. Sorry you do not.

So, apparently you just do not have a non partial source. Or maybe you just do not like them. Isn't it fun to just take info from agenda driven sites, expecially when those sites push the agenda you have??

In addition, you forgot to address the other points that I made. Like no middle class tax increases. And the whole payroll tax bullshit, me boy. You would think if it was something that cons like you felt should have been continued, then some conservative house member would have pushed for continuation of that tax decrease. But you see, dipshit, they did not. Because the cons love tax decreases for the wealthy. And only the wealthy.

More drivel. You can continue to keep playing the shoot the messenger fallacy angle, but it's not noteworthy. The bottom line, as I indicated before you showed up to spray tripe and fallacy is this:

Obama has increased the taxation on the midle class.

The middle class is not a cut and dry termination on income, and 250K is the middle class. Their taxation was increased. Along with the payroll tax cut expiration. Which increased everyone's taxes.

And then there is Obama Tax - adding yet another tax on top of the those.

Spin, spray and drool all you want. The information is right there and I have no inclination to play "impartial source" bullshit with a 12th tier poster such as yourself.

 

[Rshermr]

2. The tax increases are twelve NOT ON THE MIDDLE CLASS as you clearly said they were in your post. Another lie by you. If you read your source, you would see that all have a minimum income requirement of between $250K and $450K.

And you think 250K isn't the middle class?



point back to the 1950s again. Hows that purchasing power going? Inflation?

You're horrible at this.

Well, your opinion is that I am horrible at this. Because you say that $250K is middle class. Which, me boy, would say that it is you that is horrible at this.

For the 50 percent of families in the middle of the scale, household income ranges from $51,000 to $123,000 for a typical four-person, two-parent family. The median is about $81,000. Those numbers are from 2008, and have probably fallen 5 to 7 percent since then, on account of the recession. Median income for a single-parent, two-child family is about $25,000.
Income: How to Gauge Your Middle-Class Status - US News & World Report

Not sure if you are simply stupid, or a liar. But then, we know you lie. Hell, maybe it is both.

So, in answer to your rather stupid question, yes indeed, $250K is way, way above middle class. Hope that helps. Let me know if you need additional education.

The income range to be considered middle class:$25,500 – $76,500

The median middle class household income in 2012: $51,017
and in 1989: $51,681

Year inflation-adjusted median household income peaked at $56,080: 1999

Just think what it would be like to be honest, me poor ignorant con tool. People would not have to point out your lies all the time.

 

[Rshermr]

Yeah, yeah. The shoot the messenger fallacy. Now, me fucking retard, crawl back into your hole and dig. Dig like you've never dug before. Because there isn't any such thing as an "impartial link", me dear fuckin' retard.

I provided the information. You can display as many logical fallacies regarding it as you like. But there is nothing within that link that can not be verified elsewhere.

Me fuckin' retard.

You know better. No one needs to waste their time reading someone's drivel derived from a partisan source. And anyone who would suggest that they should, like you, is simply wasting people's time. I am not interested in trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. You avoid that by at least trying to provide a non partisan source. Most understand that. Sorry you do not.

So, apparently you just do not have a non partial source. Or maybe you just do not like them. Isn't it fun to just take info from agenda driven sites, expecially when those sites push the agenda you have??

In addition, you forgot to address the other points that I made. Like no middle class tax increases. And the whole payroll tax bullshit, me boy. You would think if it was something that cons like you felt should have been continued, then some conservative house member would have pushed for continuation of that tax decrease. But you see, dipshit, they did not. Because the cons love tax decreases for the wealthy. And only the wealthy.

More drivel. You can continue to keep playing the shoot the messenger fallacy angle, but it's not noteworthy. The bottom line, as I indicated before you showed up to spray tripe and fallacy is this:

Obama has increased the taxation on the midle class.

The middle class is not a cut and dry termination on income, and 250K is the middle class. Their taxation was increased. Along with the payroll tax cut expiration. Which increased everyone's taxes.

And then there is Obama Tax - adding yet another tax on top of the those.

Spin, spray and drool all you want. The information is right there and I have no inclination to play "impartial source" bullshit with a 12th tier poster such as yourself.

No, he has not. Which is why you are unable to show where he has. Tough lying all the time. People keep pointing out that you are lying.

Funny, step. You can always tell when you know you are caught, because you start lying like a rug and tossing out the insults. You should remember, me boy, how much I value your opinion. But you are comical. Saying that $250K is part of the middle class, and then doubling down on it. And then, being you, you can not prove your lie. Funny.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

2. The tax increases are twelve NOT ON THE MIDDLE CLASS as you clearly said they were in your post. Another lie by you. If you read your source, you would see that all have a minimum income requirement of between $250K and $450K.

And you think 250K isn't the middle class?



point back to the 1950s again. Hows that purchasing power going? Inflation?

You're horrible at this.

Well, your opinion is that I am horrible at this. Because you say that $250K is middle class. Which, me boy, would say that it is you that is horrible at this.

For the 50 percent of families in the middle of the scale, household income ranges from $51,000 to $123,000 for a typical four-person, two-parent family. The median is about $81,000. Those numbers are from 2008, and have probably fallen 5 to 7 percent since then, on account of the recession. Median income for a single-parent, two-child family is about $25,000.
Income: How to Gauge Your Middle-Class Status - US News & World Report

Not sure if you are simply stupid, or a liar. But then, we know you lie. Hell, maybe it is both.

So, in answer to your rather stupid question, yes indeed, $250K is way, way above middle class. Hope that helps. Let me know if you need additional education.

The income range to be considered middle class:$25,500 – $76,500

The median middle class household income in 2012: $51,017
and in 1989: $51,681

Year inflation-adjusted median household income peaked at $56,080: 1999

Just think what it would be like to be honest, me poor ignorant con tool. People would not have to point out your lies all the time.

SO now middle class is median income?

It even says right in your own source (not impartial, by the way...you fuckin' reject) that teh MEDIAN MIDDLE CLASS INCOME IS.....

In other words, middle class isn't scaled by median incomes. There is a range of which is considered middle class. It's not a median numbers game, Chump. Furthermore, it's also not JUST an income brakcet game, Dullard.

You lose, again.

Obama raised taxes on the middle class. It's right there.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

You know better. No one needs to waste their time reading someone's drivel derived from a partisan source. And anyone who would suggest that they should, like you, is simply wasting people's time. I am not interested in trying to pick the fly crap out of the pepper. You avoid that by at least trying to provide a non partisan source. Most understand that. Sorry you do not.

So, apparently you just do not have a non partial source. Or maybe you just do not like them. Isn't it fun to just take info from agenda driven sites, expecially when those sites push the agenda you have??

In addition, you forgot to address the other points that I made. Like no middle class tax increases. And the whole payroll tax bullshit, me boy. You would think if it was something that cons like you felt should have been continued, then some conservative house member would have pushed for continuation of that tax decrease. But you see, dipshit, they did not. Because the cons love tax decreases for the wealthy. And only the wealthy.

More drivel. You can continue to keep playing the shoot the messenger fallacy angle, but it's not noteworthy. The bottom line, as I indicated before you showed up to spray tripe and fallacy is this:

Obama has increased the taxation on the midle class.

The middle class is not a cut and dry termination on income, and 250K is the middle class. Their taxation was increased. Along with the payroll tax cut expiration. Which increased everyone's taxes.

And then there is Obama Tax - adding yet another tax on top of the those.

Spin, spray and drool all you want. The information is right there and I have no inclination to play "impartial source" bullshit with a 12th tier poster such as yourself.

No, he has not. Which is why you are unable to show where he has. Tough lying all the time. People keep pointing out that you are lying.

Funny, step. You can always tell when you know you are caught, because you start lying like a rug and tossing out the insults. You should remember, me boy, how much I value your opinion. But you are comical. Saying that $250K is part of the middle class, and then doubling down on it. And then, being you, you can not prove your lie. Funny.

I didn't have to. You proved me right by inserting your link (not an impartial source either, dullard)..


And dont forget, no one was asking you to show up in here and start spitting tripe and fallacy either. And not valuing my opinion is fine, becuase I didn't offer you my opinion, you fuckin flunky.

However, if I want your opinion on an impartial source, or what you THINK (wrongly by your own source) I'll flush the toilet. The sound is about the same.

 

[Rshermr]

More drivel. You can continue to keep playing the shoot the messenger fallacy angle, but it's not noteworthy. The bottom line, as I indicated before you showed up to spray tripe and fallacy is this:

Obama has increased the taxation on the midle class.

The middle class is not a cut and dry termination on income, and 250K is the middle class. Their taxation was increased. Along with the payroll tax cut expiration. Which increased everyone's taxes.

And then there is Obama Tax - adding yet another tax on top of the those.

Spin, spray and drool all you want. The information is right there and I have no inclination to play "impartial source" bullshit with a 12th tier poster such as yourself.

No, he has not. Which is why you are unable to show where he has. Tough lying all the time. People keep pointing out that you are lying.

Funny, step. You can always tell when you know you are caught, because you start lying like a rug and tossing out the insults. You should remember, me boy, how much I value your opinion. But you are comical. Saying that $250K is part of the middle class, and then doubling down on it. And then, being you, you can not prove your lie. Funny.

I didn't have to. You proved me right by inserting your link (not an impartial source either, dullard)..


And dont forget, no one was asking you to show up in here and start spitting tripe and fallacy either. And not valuing my opinion is fine, becuase I didn't offer you my opinion, you fuckin flunky.

However, if I want your opinion on an impartial source, or what you THINK (wrongly by your own source) I'll flush the toilet. The sound is about the same.

Maybe if you take your head out of your ass, you will be able to here something.

Where is your proof that $250K annual earnings is middle class, me lying con tool???

Yup, indeed you did offer your opinion. Go read your drivel, me boy. Hell, even most of your "facts" are simply your opinion.
So, do you have facts to prove anything, or are you simply giving up. Because, me boy, saying that $250K is middle class just does not pass the giggle test. And everyone knows it.

 

[Rshermr]

And you think 250K isn't the middle class?



point back to the 1950s again. Hows that purchasing power going? Inflation?

You're horrible at this.

Well, your opinion is that I am horrible at this. Because you say that $250K is middle class. Which, me boy, would say that it is you that is horrible at this.



Not sure if you are simply stupid, or a liar. But then, we know you lie. Hell, maybe it is both.

So, in answer to your rather stupid question, yes indeed, $250K is way, way above middle class. Hope that helps. Let me know if you need additional education.

The income range to be considered middle class:$25,500 – $76,500

The median middle class household income in 2012: $51,017
and in 1989: $51,681

Year inflation-adjusted median household income peaked at $56,080: 1999

Just think what it would be like to be honest, me poor ignorant con tool. People would not have to point out your lies all the time.

SO now middle class is median income?

It even says right in your own source (not impartial, by the way...you fuckin' reject) that teh MEDIAN MIDDLE CLASS INCOME IS.....

In other words, middle class isn't scaled by median incomes. There is a range of which is considered middle class. It's not a median numbers game, Chump. Furthermore, it's also not JUST an income brakcet game, Dullard.

You lose, again.

Obama raised taxes on the middle class. It's right there.

Yes, yes. I know. Anything to the left of your favorite bat shit crazy con sites are partial. But the source I provided you is understood to be impartial by 90% of the population, and of the thinking world. I understand that you prefer agenda driven sources. Makes things simpler to push your agenda.

But here is the thing, whether you are talking median, mean, or overall brackets from lowest to highest, no one thinks that $250K is part of the middle class. Got an actual impartial source that backs you up, me boy. Because, in general, most economists see the middle class as about 50% of the population in terms of annual income. And, if you actually know anything about statistics, you know that there will be very little difference in a large population between mean and median.
Latest I have seen, $250K in annual income put you at about the upper few percent. So, the taxes affected those in the upper 2% and HIGHER. So, try to sell those increases as being middle class income folks to some of your bat shit crazy libertarian friends. They may believe that in the tea party world. But for the thinking world, your claim simply does not pass the giggle test. But nice try. Funny that you get so pissy when you get caught lying, though.

Here are a couple more:

In 2006, there were approximately 116,011,000 households in the United States. 1.93% of all households had annual incomes exceeding $250,000. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

Plenty of smart people have taken a stab at that question. In the past few years, the "middle class" income range has been described as between $32,900 and $64,000 a year (a Pew Charitable Trusts study), between $50,800 and $122,000 (a U.S. Department of Commerce study), and between $20,600 and $102,000 (the U.S. Census Bureau's middle 60% of incomes).

Economists often start with the middle 20% of the country – people earning between $39,000 and $63,000 a year – and work their way out. Some then stretch the definition to include the middle 60%, which has an income range of $20,600 to $102,000.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/04/14/middle-class-hard-define/2080565/

So, did you see any estimate where your statement that $250K of annual earnings makes one part of the middle class???? Neither did I.

Sorry you can find no source to support your lie. Just really pisses you off when you get caught, eh, dipshit.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Since we're now diving into "impartial sources" such as wiki, here's one for you, Dullard:

American middle class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Income varies considerably from near the national median to well in excess of $100,000.[2][4] Household income figures, however, do not always reflect class status and standard of living, as they are largely influenced by the number of income earners and fail to recognize household size. It is therefore possible for a large, dual-earner, lower middle class household to out-earn a small, one-earner, upper middle class household.[5] The middle classes are very influential, as they encompass the majority of voters, writers, teachers, journalists, and editors.[7] Most societal trends in the US originate within the middle classes.[8

Income is one of a household's attributes most commonly used to determine its class status. Yet, income may not always accurately reflect a household's position within society or the economy.[27] Unlike personal income, household income does not reflect occupational achievement as much as it measures the number of income earners. Sociologist Dennis Gilbert acknowledges that a working-class household with two income earners may out-earn a single-income upper-middle-class household, as the number of income earners has evolved into one of the most important variables in determining household income. For example, according to the US Department of Labor, two registered nurses could quite easily command a household income of $126,000 annually,[31] while the median income for a lawyer was $94,930.[32]

Furthermore, household income fails to recognize household size. For example, a single attorney, earning $95,000, may have a higher standard of living than a family of four with an income of $120,000. Yet household income is still a commonly used class indicator, as household members share the same economic fate and class position.[14]

The parade [of income earners with height representing income] suggest that [the] relationship between the distribution of income and the class structure is... blurred in the middle...we saw dual-income working class marchers looking down on single-income upper-middle-class marchers. In sum, the class structures as we have defined it...does not exactly match the distribution of household income.
—Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998

In other words, you incredibly slow, Dullard, is that income doesn't necessarily gauge accurately who constitutes the "middle class". There are several variables omitted from such silly projections.

- Demographics- In NYC, the income levels are fastly different than in rural Mississippi (your most probably location)

- Number in household - Especially earners.

Again, there is no magic number on who is the middle class. You're pissing up a rope, Junior.

250K for two earners in NYC is "middle class". Therefore, Obama raised taxes on the middle class with Obama Tax. Again with a payroll tax increase over top of the expiration of the payroll tax cut.

Obama raised taxes on the middle class.

Period. End of story. You lose, Dullard.

 

[editec]

What has Obama done to help the middle class?

Food stamps and heating assistance.

Not much unless you needed it, then it was HUGE.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

What has Obama done to help the middle class?

Food stamps and heating assistance.

Not much unless you needed it, then it was HUGE.

Out of his own pocket?

 

[Rshermr]

Since we're now diving into "impartial sources" such as wiki, here's one for you, Dullard:

American middle class - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Income varies considerably from near the national median to well in excess of $100,000.[2][4] Household income figures, however, do not always reflect class status and standard of living, as they are largely influenced by the number of income earners and fail to recognize household size. It is therefore possible for a large, dual-earner, lower middle class household to out-earn a small, one-earner, upper middle class household.[5] The middle classes are very influential, as they encompass the majority of voters, writers, teachers, journalists, and editors.[7] Most societal trends in the US originate within the middle classes.[8

Income is one of a household's attributes most commonly used to determine its class status. Yet, income may not always accurately reflect a household's position within society or the economy.[27] Unlike personal income, household income does not reflect occupational achievement as much as it measures the number of income earners. Sociologist Dennis Gilbert acknowledges that a working-class household with two income earners may out-earn a single-income upper-middle-class household, as the number of income earners has evolved into one of the most important variables in determining household income. For example, according to the US Department of Labor, two registered nurses could quite easily command a household income of $126,000 annually,[31] while the median income for a lawyer was $94,930.[32]

Furthermore, household income fails to recognize household size. For example, a single attorney, earning $95,000, may have a higher standard of living than a family of four with an income of $120,000. Yet household income is still a commonly used class indicator, as household members share the same economic fate and class position.[14]

The parade [of income earners with height representing income] suggest that [the] relationship between the distribution of income and the class structure is... blurred in the middle...we saw dual-income working class marchers looking down on single-income upper-middle-class marchers. In sum, the class structures as we have defined it...does not exactly match the distribution of household income.
—Dennis Gilbert, The American Class Structure, 1998

In other words, you incredibly slow, Dullard, is that income doesn't necessarily gauge accurately who constitutes the "middle class". There are several variables omitted from such silly projections.

- Demographics- In NYC, the income levels are fastly different than in rural Mississippi (your most probably location)

- Number in household - Especially earners.

Again, there is no magic number on who is the middle class. You're pissing up a rope, Junior.

250K for two earners in NYC is "middle class". Therefore, Obama raised taxes on the middle class with Obama Tax. Again with a payroll tax increase over top of the expiration of the payroll tax cut.

Obama raised taxes on the middle class.

Period. End of story. You lose, Dullard.

End of story because you can not find a single source that states that $250K is middle class income?? You find a source that middle class income is higher IN ONE CITY IN THE US.
You can not find it because your claim is agenda driven, and untrue. Other than that, it is a great statement. The upper 2% of income earners, those roughly above $250K, had tax increases. The middle class did not.

Your problem, me poor ignorant tool, is that simply because you say it does not mean it is true. It only means that you are capable of believing anything you want. A trait of congenital idiots.

Saying that someone that earns $250K is middle class makes someone a dullard. And regardless of your attempts at insults, that someone is you. Just does not pass the giggle test.

 

[rdean]

Well, he raised our taxes, expired the payroll cut and then gave us Obama Tax. That has to count for something. Even if it's a negative result when we say "help" the middle class.

You have a link for that? Cuz it sounds like something you pulled out your ass.

Sure thing, Rderp. Not that I expect you to actually read or anything....

2013 Tax Rate Changes | Income Tax Changes in 2013

13 Tax Increases That Started January 1, 2013

Taxing people that make over $400,000 a year and estates worth more than $5,000,000????

Why do you care? You don't have $5?

 

[jasonnfree]

Well, he raised our taxes, expired the payroll cut and then gave us Obama Tax. That has to count for something. Even if it's a negative result when we say "help" the middle class.

The payroll cut was money people had been paying into social security. It was for only 2 years

 

[Hoffstra]

Their taxes went up due to Obama letting the Bush Tax Cuts end....

Federal tax rates for the middle class are the same as they were in 2009.

 

[jasonnfree]

Their taxes went up due to Obama letting the Bush Tax Cuts end.
If you are a member of a Union, Obamacare is going to have a negative impact on your current Health Care.

Corporate America will not have to adhere to Obamacare for a year. Congress and there staff
as well as appointed officials are exempt from Obamacare.

However, the middle class gets no relief from Obamacare. Are you happy that you voted for Obama? Has your life gotten better? Wake up!

Obama's kept a republican out of the white house. That's enough for me. Republicans are for the extremely wealthy and large corporations period. They do nothing for us. They're the reason we don't have national healthcare like other modern countries. This latest shutdown was planned months in advice by private citizens and multibillionaires that want to steal what's left of this country. Read the article I posted below, just take a couple minutes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/u...is-months-in-the-planning.html?pagewanted=all

Only the republicans, hehe? Is that why lobbyists were the architect for Obama Tax?

You lefties are fuckin' log jammed. If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.

Did you read the article? Or are you going to just throw things out there? If so, you forgot Bill Ayres and Reverend Wright. Obama dissapointed a lot of people by listening to lobbyists and not pushing single payer. Maybe he figured he didn't have the clout to push through single payer. ACA probably would have been voted down in the supreme court if health care companies weren't involved in Obamacare. Now is a good time for ending money in politics and getting more liberals into the supreme court to overturn citizens united.

 

[Rshermr]

Obama's kept a republican out of the white house. That's enough for me. Republicans are for the extremely wealthy and large corporations period. They do nothing for us. They're the reason we don't have national healthcare like other modern countries. This latest shutdown was planned months in advice by private citizens and multibillionaires that want to steal what's left of this country. Read the article I posted below, just take a couple minutes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/u...is-months-in-the-planning.html?pagewanted=all

Only the republicans, hehe? Is that why lobbyists were the architect for Obama Tax?

You lefties are fuckin' log jammed. If it wasn't so sad, it would be funny.

Did you read the article? Or are you going to just throw things out there? If so, you forgot Bill Ayres and Reverend Wright. Obama dissapointed a lot of people by listening to lobbyists and not pushing single payer. Maybe he figured he didn't have the clout to push through single payer. ACA probably would have been voted down in the supreme court if health care companies weren't involved in Obamacare. Now is a good time for ending money in politics and getting more liberals into the supreme court to overturn citizens united.

AMEN, Comrade. Sorry, I couldn't help myself. Just love to make the cons nuts over marxist words. They actually think that there are really just two political/economic systems. One is laissez fair capitalism, the other communism.

Why would cons want to pay half of what we do for health care by going with single payer, when they can make the insurance companies rich. You have to have your priorities.

And of course, cons believe that corporations are people, and that money is speech. After all, their leaders all say it is so.

 

[rdean]

You have a link for that? Cuz it sounds like something you pulled out your ass.

Sure thing, Rderp. Not that I expect you to actually read or anything....

2013 Tax Rate Changes | Income Tax Changes in 2013

13 Tax Increases That Started January 1, 2013

Taxing people that make over $400,000 a year and estates worth more than $5,000,000????

Why do you care? You don't have $5?

Well?