[Redys]

Oh, by the way. We're upper middle class. Our health insurance costs $1700 a month (we pay the entire amount, my husband's firm doesn't pay anything). My daughter had appendicits almost two years ago. I've paid over $4000 to get certain claims people off my back (including $2700 for an anestheseologist's bill). I'm still trying to get another $1200 paid (two doctor visits and the ambulance, my carrier insists that my daughter, who couldn't walk at the time, should have been able to walk about three blocks to get a taxi, instead of my calling an ambulance, even though I cleared it through her primary caregiver first). Because we have clout and I can fight, this PROBABLY hasn't affected our credit rating, but I still haven't been able to get the bills paid. How can the average people afford $6000 for a common ailment?

[StitlyDute]

I'll grant you that. As for housing, I think people could make due with less, just as they do everywhere else in the world, including most affluent countries. Manhattan is pricey, but most of the US has very inexpensive housing and people live comparatively like kings in a US suburb even when compared to other affluent countries. We're spending beyond our means,partically because there isn't enough incentive to invest.

[ggdfgtdfffhfyj]

And ^ because we allow the public airwaves to be used to SELL us on the idea that we have no worth unless we're constantly spending. And most Americans buy into it.

BTW: Who was it that has been relentlessly selling the American people on the idea of home ownership? Claiming that no matter a person's economic status it was the be-all and end-all towards fiscal salvation?

How the worm turns ...

[kimaddison]

I agree that we are spending beyond our means. But I think that a number of people (not quantifiable, but I think highly significant) fell victim to marketing fear. I honestly think that people thought that if they couldn't buy NOW they'd never be able to. So they stretched. Look, our bankruptcy rate is about to hit the stratosphere. This IS something new. It is NOT typical of the American people. It is sad. Who is the villian here? The American who spent too much? Or the corporate entity that convinced them that it was timely and necessary (not to mention possible)?

Can anyone really think that people would opt for bankruptcy (well, maybe Trump, but that's a different game) and possible homelessness? I don't have much sympathy for the people who bought extra properties with the thought of flipping them, but for those who are using their credit cards to pay for groceries because they can't otherwise afford food, well, those people I feel for deeply.

[Les Allen]

By the way, regarding your daughter's appendicitis, I hope she's doing OK now.

[jojocomok]

Of course, people who can't afford their groceries that's sad. But that's not the upper middle class - the upper middle class are running up their credit card debt at Jean Georges. We've always had some poverty, but the remarkable indebtedness of Americans is at all levels of income. We've become a nation of debtors. We even get mad when our politicians try to tell us we need to balance the budget. I think we're hooked.

And yes, the Bush administration and the debt lovers who voted for him are a major player in driving that destructive culture.

[Anaedilla]

Thanks investordude,
I must say that we sometimes agree, and sometimes disagree, but I find you a thoughtful and kind correspondent. At the risk of sounding sappy, this is why I like WNY so much.

[dremucha]

Investordude, this is merely anectdotal, but I think it may amuse you.

Recently I received a call from one of my banks/creditors offering my entire credit line for 5.99% life of borrowing. I didn't want nor need the money but I couldn't help mentioning to our man in Moombai (I apologize if I'm misspelling) that I had had another better offer from another bank. I immediately was offered 2.99% life of loan (less than the SAME bank was paying interest on my savings account). I took the money, put it in my savings bank, and felt bemused.

People in the US are being constantly innundated with opportunity to overspend. My credit line shows up in total American debt, but it isn't that at all. I'm making money on my debt. Go figure.

[Nwxffgke]

I enjoy our discussion too pricedout

[K0aM7urg]

This has been a great discussion, but can we now bring it back to the upper middle class/AMT tax burden vs. the truly wealthy not so tax burden? I'm upper middle class and I'm pissed beyond belief. I was feeling guilty, because when I heard that the tax rates might change, I thought they might benefit me (look, I don't bleed readily, but I have known that the tax system is regressive). I have since learned that nothing in the tax code will benefit anyone with less than an earned income of approximately 1.2M.

!.2 million is not upper middle class (although in this crazy city we live in, it might be close these days, at least in terms of what you can get if you want to buy).

[mitiaycatq]

Hmmm, are you sure? I would think if we have 21 million people on AMT, very few of them have 1.2 million in income - so the AMT relief must be broader than that.

[feeshyLew]

If you look over the info / source material which has been offered up in this thread you'll see that in 2007 it is estimated that the AMT will hit single filers @ ~ $50K / married filers @ ~ $75K.

And if you're one of those affected then don't forget to file those quarterly Estimated Tax Payments - or you might be penalized.