3 ms·

To look at it another way, this family is SAVING as much money - after all taxes, after all expenses - each year as the gross income of the median family in the

To look at it another way, this family is SAVING as much money - after all taxes, after all expenses - each year as the gross income of the median family in the United States. The linked article is a troll.

hugh3 16y ago
And an incredibly successful one. I bet this article is the most viewed article on thefiscaltimes.com ever. No emotion sells newspapers like mild outrage. The newspaper's job is to make you just a little bit outraged every day. Usually the real news of the world should be more than sufficient to outrage you, but on occasion they like to supplement it with stories like this. It's almost as good a trick as my personal favourite: the top ten list with one inappropriate item deliberately included.
- arghnoname 16y ago
  Not just that, but it actually ran in the Washington Post a little bit ago (bylines Fiscal Times). That's good trolling.
duffbeer703 16y ago
You're looking at this and seeing the wrong problem. You have a family that is doing well enough that they can save sufficient money to retire at a similar level and put their kids through college to be able to attain a similar economic and social status. In doing that, they aren't netting out a ton of money. The problem is, that wasn't always the case. My grandparents in the 60's and 70's were able to own a home in NYC, own new or late model cars without loans, and put 5 kids through college with minimal debt on a single, blue-collar income. Most of the replies in this thread are whining about elitism, blah blah blah. $250k of earned income sounds like alot, but this hypothetical family is just as much a wage slave as anyone else. They just have more stuff to lose than you.
CWuestefeld 16y ago
Quite. I'm actually sympathetic to the argument being made -- that a given income may seem "rich" in one place, but actually not buy so much elsewhere. Living in NJ, I can see this every day. But when you look into the details of the article, it's hard to buy it. The article says, for example, that it's "impossible" for the parents to clean and dress themselves. Bunk. If the rest of society can do it, why can't this family? Why do they spend so much money eating out, and spending $10/lunch every day at work? So: ignore the article, but please still consider the fact that what might seem rich in one circumstance may not go as far elsewhere.

hugh3 16y ago

And an incredibly successful one. I bet this article is the most viewed article on thefiscaltimes.com ever. No emotion sells newspapers like mild outrage. The newspaper's job is to make you just a little bit outraged every day. Usually the real news of the world should be more than sufficient to outrage you, but on occasion they like to supplement it with stories like this. It's almost as good a trick as my personal favourite: the top ten list with one inappropriate item deliberately included.

arghnoname 16y ago
Not just that, but it actually ran in the Washington Post a little bit ago (bylines Fiscal Times). That's good trolling.

duffbeer703 16y ago

You're looking at this and seeing the wrong problem. You have a family that is doing well enough that they can save sufficient money to retire at a similar level and put their kids through college to be able to attain a similar economic and social status. In doing that, they aren't netting out a ton of money. The problem is, that wasn't always the case. My grandparents in the 60's and 70's were able to own a home in NYC, own new or late model cars without loans, and put 5 kids through college with minimal debt on a single, blue-collar income. Most of the replies in this thread are whining about elitism, blah blah blah. $250k of earned income sounds like alot, but this hypothetical family is just as much a wage slave as anyone else. They just have more stuff to lose than you.

CWuestefeld 16y ago

Quite. I'm actually sympathetic to the argument being made -- that a given income may seem "rich" in one place, but actually not buy so much elsewhere. Living in NJ, I can see this every day. But when you look into the details of the article, it's hard to buy it. The article says, for example, that it's "impossible" for the parents to clean and dress themselves. Bunk. If the rest of society can do it, why can't this family? Why do they spend so much money eating out, and spending $10/lunch every day at work? So: ignore the article, but please still consider the fact that what might seem rich in one circumstance may not go as far elsewhere.