for John McCain?

McCain is teh AWESOME!

Thanks for that information!

But enough with the damn tax cuts.

Stuff like social security do and will cost monwy not to mention health care.

roads? Power grid?

Enough with the tax cuts.

I'm sure the 150K number is negotaible, and needs to be evaluted from a region perspective, as you are providing here.  What would you suggest?

Abolishing the AMT would be a terrible idea, but that number needs to be recaluculated, though, and I believe that congress is working on it.

All in all, I don't see too big of an issue here.

Leave California?

Miker2008...

Checked out your other diaries, you sure seem like a bitter Hillary supporter.

Too bad, hope you can find another outlet for your anger, rather then lieing about the Democratic Nominee for President on a Democratic Blog.

I think this would sell better here:

http://www.redstate.com

The top 5% of incomes is currently $176,000 I think, so setting the tax neutral point around there seems like a fair way to go. As for the AMT, by all means, index it to the income distribution in the US. If you want to catch the top 2% then set index it to the changes in that number.

For 670,000$ you could get this beauty.

6,000 sq ft.  IN the city of Minneapolis (no crappy suburban living) and you get clean air and water to boot unlike all of California.

When you go to get your drivers license renewed, it takes 15 minutes, not a day off of work.

Oh and we have more park space and theaters per capita than California...by like double.

First the number is $250K not $150K. Only if you are making $250 and above will your taxes go up. if you are making 75- to 249,999 your taxes will remain the same.

ATM is to be adjusted to truly hit only the higher income brackets instead of the middle class.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/eco nomy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/?postve rsion=2008061113

I live in one of the most expensive areas of the country - downtown San Francisco. I make nowhere near $150,000 and I pay some of the highest rent and sales tax in the nation. Yet, I don't personally need a tax cut. I could even handle a modest tax increase if the cause was especially appealing - like government-run health insurance or mass transit.

I guess my willingness to pay taxes for the benefit of my country, my city and my society just shows that I'm another worthless liberal.

So feel free to keep whining about how much it sucks to be a part of the upper-middle class.

According to the IRS, 89% of Americans report less than $100,000 in adjusted gross income (2005).  

Here ya go CA
http://www.irvinehousingblog.com/

$150 grand too low...?
Your out of touch comment reminds me of this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sqkJ8f4p tk

I live in California in a 1056 sq foot condo, drive a prius, sipping my latte and I do it all for under $100k.  Wherever you are living...mooove.

I live in Los Angeles, and think the dividing line is just fine.

Thanks for playing.

is it 150k per person or 150K per family?

I tend to agree with the diarist, assuming his numbers are correct.  I don't make $150,000/year, but like to think I will someday with a bit of hard work and smart planning.  $150,000/year certainly doesn't make you rich, at least not here in northern New Jersey.  It may make you upper middle class in some parts of the country, but are we as a party now willing to raise taxes not only on the wealthy but also on the higher end of the middle class?

That strikes me as neither good politics (because the upper middle-class tends to vote in greater numbers than the lower and middle middle-classes), nor good policy.  

I don't understand the disdain many liberals have for people who earn more money.  I'm not talking about mega-rich plutocrats who trust-fund their way through life.  I'm talking about the majority of upper middle-class people who worked their asses off in school, incurred obscene amounts of student loan debt, and slave for 60-80 a week behind a desk.  Hard work is rewarded in a capitalist economy, and that is the way it should be.