• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Romney and the middle income bracket

P

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
38,984
Reaction score
14,324
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Romney: 'Middle-Income' Up To $250,000 Per Year

Does anyone really understand Romney and what he means? I saw the interview and actually glossed over this part because it made no sense at the time and I could not be bothered.. but looking at it.. what the hell does he actually mean.. does he even know?

"Is $100,000 middle income?" Stephanopoulos asked.
"No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less," Romney responded.
Click to expand...

Eh? 100k is "less" is it not? Or is it that only 200k to 250k is middle income aka middle class in Romney world?

And of course the campaign tried to do some damage control..

His campaign later clarified that Romney was referencing household income, not individual income.
Click to expand...

And so what!? Is a household income of 200k to 250k middle class or is it less.. or .. what the hell do you actually mean Romney?

It is odd that the media have not hit him yet again on this out of touchness.. but guess they are just waiting for him to screw up yet again on this matter.
 
Serious? Really? These hyper-partisan threads are getting pretty amusing these days.
 
PeteEU said:
Romney: 'Middle-Income' Up To $250,000 Per Year

Does anyone really understand Romney and what he means? I saw the interview and actually glossed over this part because it made no sense at the time and I could not be bothered.. but looking at it.. what the hell does he actually mean.. does he even know?



Eh? 100k is "less" is it not? Or is it that only 200k to 250k is middle income aka middle class in Romney world?

And of course the campaign tried to do some damage control..



And so what!? Is a household income of 200k to 250k middle class or is it less.. or .. what the hell do you actually mean Romney?

It is odd that the media have not hit him yet again on this out of touchness.. but guess they are just waiting for him to screw up yet again on this matter.
Click to expand...

It sounds to me like you either don't understand plain English...or you are picking imaginary nits.

He was asked if $100,000.00 was middle income and he answered that middle income is $250,000.00 or less. Is that difficult for you to understand?
 
PeteEU said:
Romney: 'Middle-Income' Up To $250,000 Per Year

Does anyone really understand Romney and what he means? I saw the interview and actually glossed over this part because it made no sense at the time and I could not be bothered.. but looking at it.. what the hell does he actually mean.. does he even know?



Eh? 100k is "less" is it not? Or is it that only 200k to 250k is middle income aka middle class in Romney world?

And of course the campaign tried to do some damage control..



And so what!? Is a household income of 200k to 250k middle class or is it less.. or .. what the hell do you actually mean Romney?

It is odd that the media have not hit him yet again on this out of touchness.. but guess they are just waiting for him to screw up yet again on this matter.
Click to expand...

okay. did you realize that this is the exact same threshold that the Obama Administration uses when you posted this thread? or is this just another excellent example of self-pwnage?
 
PeteEU said:
Romney: 'Middle-Income' Up To $250,000 Per Year

Does anyone really understand Romney and what he means? I saw the interview and actually glossed over this part because it made no sense at the time and I could not be bothered.. but looking at it.. what the hell does he actually mean.. does he even know?



Eh? 100k is "less" is it not? Or is it that only 200k to 250k is middle income aka middle class in Romney world?

And of course the campaign tried to do some damage control..

And so what!? Is a household income of 200k to 250k middle class or is it less.. or .. what the hell do you actually mean Romney?

It is odd that the media have not hit him yet again on this out of touchness.. but guess they are just waiting for him to screw up yet again on this matter.
Click to expand...

no no no, here Romney said something intelligent. He says middle class is up to somewhere between 200k-250k, so he considers people making over 250k to no longer be in the true middle class.

He probably got briefed after the fiasco 4 years ago when McCain said $1 million is "not much".


I think for household, these are my brackets (obviously varies depending on where in the country you live).

20k- (poverty, government should give these people some money)
20k-30k (poor, no tax)
30k-75k (lower middle class, low tax no more than 20%)
75k - 250k (middle class, 20%-30% tax)
250k - 1 mill (traditional "upper middle" class, 30-40% tax) - this is where Obama is proposing tax hikes
1 mill - 10 mill (upper class, 30-40% tax) - this Should also be included in tax hikes
10mill+ (super rich, 15% tax or less, though it really should be 50% tax and then deductions for investments and donations) - Obama hasn't said anything specifically about raising taxes here, I sure want him to. I assume the main problem here is these people are global so they'll just go where ever the tax is lowest unfortunately.

Obviously "class" has more to do with than just money but for simplicity just some rough numbers.
 
Last edited:
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the middle class of america is composed of people who make above the median income of the USA. Am I right or not?

In 2010, the median income was over 50k... so that means that people who make over 50k to 250k/year (households, not individuals) are middle class... is this correct or not?

Ofc, those that make a bit over 50k are lower middle class.. those that make more than that are middle middle class... and then upper middle class.
 
Rainman05 said:
I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the middle class of america is composed of people who make above the median income of the USA. Am I right or not?

In 2010, the median income was over 50k... so that means that people who make over 50k to 250k/year (households, not individuals) are middle class... is this correct or not?

Ofc, those that make a bit over 50k are lower middle class.. those that make more than that are middle middle class... and then upper middle class.
Click to expand...

Well the governments definition of middle class isn't the traditional true definition of the middle class which is really the 10-1% range.

I think government definition is around 25% tile to 75% tile which translates to 25-75k annual income i think, not 100% sure if that's household or individual, would have to assume it's more likely the first of the two.

Government "middle class" is really more "middle range". Whats so horrible is they use the term "middle class" in elections for either the "true middle class" or "average income" interchangeably to best suit their agenda.
 
shiang said:
Well the governments definition of middle class isn't the traditional true definition of the middle class which is really the 10-1% range.

I think government definition is around 25% tile to 75% tile which translates to 25-75k annual income i think, not 100% sure if that's household or individual, would have to assume it's more likely the first of the two.

Government "middle class" is really more "middle range". Whats so horrible is they use the term "middle class" in elections for either the "true middle class" or "average income" interchangeably to best suit their agenda.
Click to expand...

Arguing over the absolute limits of 'middle class' is akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Everyone has an opinion and nobody is correct - or incorrect (unless they are obviously lying thru their teeth to create a strawman.)

Since Romney is using basically the same range of numbers as Obama, any criticism of Romney on this is pure ignorance and blatant hypocrisy.
 
Mycroft said:
It sounds to me like you either don't understand plain English...or you are picking imaginary nits.

He was asked if $100,000.00 was middle income and he answered that middle income is $250,000.00 or less. Is that difficult for you to understand?
Click to expand...

Cant you read?

"Is $100,000 middle income?" Stephanopoulos asked.
"No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less," Romney responded.
Click to expand...

Hence he first says NO that 100k is middle income, and states it is 200k to 250k only, but also "less".... which does include 100K... in other words he is contradicting him self at least twice in the same freaking sentence... and you say that I cant read English? PFT!
 
shiang said:
no no no, here Romney said something intelligent. He says middle class is up to somewhere between 200k-250k, so he considers people making over 250k to no longer be in the true middle class.

He probably got briefed after the fiasco 4 years ago when McCain said $1 million is "not much".
Click to expand...

Actually it is worse than McCain.

If you actually read what he said.. he was asked if 100k was middle class. He said no and then stated it was 200k to 250k and less.

So first he denies that 100k is middle class, and states what he thinks is middle class and in doing so he contradicts himself in his first denial that 100k was not middle class.

Point is.. he is either very bad in articulating himself, arrogant or out right stupid... or all 3 in one.
 
Rokkitsci said:
Arguing over the absolute limits of 'middle class' is akin to arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Everyone has an opinion and nobody is correct - or incorrect (unless they are obviously lying thru their teeth to create a strawman.)

Since Romney is using basically the same range of numbers as Obama, any criticism of Romney on this is pure ignorance and blatant hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

It's not what they think is middle class it's what they want to do with it that separates the two candidates. Don't get me wrong I don't think Obama is from the slums of Chicago, he's lead a privileged life as well.
 
PeteEU said:
Actually it is worse than McCain.

If you actually read what he said.. he was asked if 100k was middle class. He said no and then stated it was 200k to 250k and less.

So first he denies that 100k is middle class, and states what he thinks is middle class and in doing so he contradicts himself in his first denial that 100k was not middle class.

Point is.. he is either very bad in articulating himself, arrogant or out right stupid... or all 3 in one.
Click to expand...

Typical lack of oratory skills I think. That and ignoring the question asked.

He should've said (and I think meant)

"Yes, 100k is middle class. I would consider then range to be 75k (or whatever, 25k is probably the politically correct number but I don't think Romney can imagine that) to somewhere between 200k and 250k."

He does have a payroll, I can't imagine him being THAT ignorant to not realize, at least within a few factors, what typical pay is. ...But then again I've been shocked before by people who are supposedly knowledgeable and educated.
 
Last edited:
PeteEU said:
Cant you read?



Hence he first says NO that 100k is middle income, and states it is 200k to 250k only, but also "less".... which does include 100K... in other words he is contradicting him self at least twice in the same freaking sentence... and you say that I cant read English? PFT!
Click to expand...

He didn't say it was "200k to 250K only".

Do I need to remind you of what you posted?

"Is $100,000 middle income?" Stephanopoulos asked.
"No, middle income is $200,000 to $250,000 and less," Romney responded.
Click to expand...
 
Couldnt be that Georgie was trying to bait some sort of trap so Romney made clear what he felt the definition of middle class was. shrug

picking nits at best
 
Ok, this is a non issue I think. He most certainly said it wrong and contradicted him self in wording, but it does seem like he's trying to say 250k or less (or 200k or less, or what ever same thing) Though I wouldn't consider any household making under 25k remotely close to middle class by any definition.

I do think common place blunders like this WILL hurt Romney in the debates. How Much? will depend on what issues, and how often he blunders.
 
Mycroft said:
He didn't say it was "200k to 250K only".
Click to expand...

Well... you see that is the problem. He did not say only, but why say 200k to 250k and the add less, just after you have said NO to 100k being middle class?

I am glad you as a partisan can decipher what he actually means but the rest of us mere mortals find what he said quite confusing..so maybe you can enlighten us... does Romney mean that 100k is middle class or not?

Remember he did say no to the question from the reporter...
 
PeteEU said:
Cant you read?



Hence he first says NO that 100k is middle income, and states it is 200k to 250k only, but also "less".... which does include 100K... in other words he is contradicting him self at least twice in the same freaking sentence... and you say that I cant read English? PFT!
Click to expand...

It's a matter of perspective, and being reasonable.

Romney assumed me meant 100k as the top. Or just a slip of tongue. That seems more reasonable than assuming he thinks 100k is below middle class.
 
Ya I would title this thread.

"Romney fails to understand question asked"

It seems clear to me Romney disagreed that 100k is the cap for middle class, and then saying the cap should be between 200-250k. While failing to directly answer the question given.
 
Aberration said:
It's a matter of perspective, and being reasonable.

Romney assumed me meant 100k as the top. Or just a slip of tongue. That seems more reasonable than assuming he thinks 100k is below middle class.
Click to expand...

No it is not a matter of perspective. He was asked a very clear and simple question.. Is 100k middle class?.. he replied no and then started to backtrack. It is very clear when you see the interview and read the text.. Either Romney was thinking of something else (his car elevator maybe?) and miss-spoke or he did not understand the very simple question. Regardless, of which it was... it does not exactly show Romney as the great thinker and statesman as he and his GOPers want him to be.. it in fact shows him as out of touch since he answered the very simple question... Is 100k middle class... with a no and then started to set some strange boundaries that made no sense.

It also explains some what why his whole campaign is such a mess at this moment....
 
PeteEU said:
No it is not a matter of perspective. He was asked a very clear and simple question.. Is 100k middle class?.. he replied no and then started to backtrack. It is very clear when you see the interview and read the text.. Either Romney was thinking of something else (his car elevator maybe?) and miss-spoke or he did not understand the very simple question. Regardless, of which it was... it does not exactly show Romney as the great thinker and statesman as he and his GOPers want him to be.. it in fact shows him as out of touch since he answered the very simple question... Is 100k middle class... with a no and then started to set some strange boundaries that made no sense.

It also explains some what why his whole campaign is such a mess at this moment....
Click to expand...

speaking of stupid comments

"57 states"
"corpseman"

the first was a freudian slip since in islamic teaching there are 57 states of islam
the second was just an ignorant reading of the teleprompter.

so before you libs attack Romney on any slips, you better remember that your guy has said some pretty dumb things.
 
PeteEU said:
Well... you see that is the problem. He did not say only, but why say 200k to 250k and the add less, just after you have said NO to 100k being middle class?

I am glad you as a partisan can decipher what he actually means but the rest of us mere mortals find what he said quite confusing..so maybe you can enlighten us... does Romney mean that 100k is middle class or not?

Remember he did say no to the question from the reporter...
Click to expand...

He said no because he was clarifying the question. He was asked if it was $100,000.00. It wasn't. It was $250,000.00 or less.

Come on, Pete...how long are you going to pick this imaginary nit?
 
Mycroft said:
He said no because he was clarifying the question. He was asked if it was $100,000.00. It wasn't. It was $250,000.00 or less.

Come on, Pete...how long are you going to pick this imaginary nit?
Click to expand...

That might be what he wanted to say, but that is not what he said.. Sorry but you can try to spin this as much as you want, but fact is he said no, and then started to backtrack.. just as he has done so many times before on so many issues.
 
Mycroft said:
He said no because he was clarifying the question. He was asked if it was $100,000.00. It wasn't. It was $250,000.00 or less.

Come on, Pete...how long are you going to pick this imaginary nit?
Click to expand...

its all they have, their guy is a massive failure so they have to resort to petty personal attacks.
 
Bobcat said:
its all they have, their guy is a massive failure so they have to resort to petty personal attacks.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure republicans do the same thing... how many times did we see the videos where obama "slipped that he was a muslim". No party is on the hill, looking down on the other. Both have their fair share of people who sit up on the hill... and both have their fair share of people who are in the mud, brawling with each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom