Obama Defines “Middle Class”
WASHINGTON — 9 p.m. EDT
I wanted to throw out for consideration and debate a question I’ve found myself asking Democrats, Republicans, Independents and economists for years: who is in the middle class?
In the 1990s, the answers I received were almost entirely linked to income figures – the income of a family of four, or three or of a single person in his or her twenties, or an elderly person on a fixed income determined how close or how far they were from “middle class” status.
About the time of millennium, I began to notice that the answer to who was “middle class” began to change from relatively precise figures to very broad income strata. It was as if politicians — particularly at the national level — began to believe that incomes varied as widely as the core cost of living. Therefore, an income designation, for example, linked to the U.S. Census Bureau definition of median or mean income for an individual or family, would no longer work as a means of defining with precision who was or was not middle class.
In other words, individuals or families in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco, Boston or other high-cost urban areas could earn three times the median or mean family income and still feel strapped by month-to-month costs.
In other words, middle class status seemed over time to be less rooted in specific income figures, but regional differences in income and cost-of-living. It also seemed to reflect a sense among politicians and some economists that “middle class” is not just a matter of figures, but also a state of mind.
At my suggestion, my colleague Bill Hemmer was kind of enough to ask Sen. Barack Obama in London how he defined the middle class.
Here is the transcript of that exchange:
HEMMER: You mentioned the economy. You travel back to the U.S. this weekend. You’re going back to a country with a limping economy, “ailing,” I think, is one of the words The Economist used at the end of last week.
You have suggested that taxes will be raised on some Americans. You have also suggested that taxes will be lowered for some Americans. In a limping or an ailing economy, why raise taxes on anyone?
OBAMA: Well, the — because we also have a $400 billion or so budget deficit, because we’ve also got to invest in infrastructure. We’ve got to deal with the fact that a lot more people are unemployed and are going to need unemployment benefits. We’ve got to shore up the housing market because people are experiencing foreclosures.
And that’s why I’ve structured a change in the tax code where if you are making $150,000 a year or less, you’re getting a tax cut, 95 percent of the American families will get a tax cut.
HEMMER: What do you consider…
OBAMA: And the people who are going to see their income taxes raised, go up, are making more than $250,000 a year. So you and I will pay a little bit more in taxes because we can afford it. And what that allows us to do is to help the vast majority of Americans who are really hurting in this economy.
HEMMER: I know we’re pushed for time. Can you give me a definition of the middle class based on income, within a range?
OBAMA: You know, what I would say is, if you are making more than $250,000, than you’re more than middle class. You’re doing better. If you are making less than $250,000, then you are definitely somewhere in the middle class.
And if you’re making $150,000 or less, than I think most Americans would agree that you’re middle class. So that’s why the fact that if you are making less than $250,000, you will not see your taxes go up under an Obama administration. And you will get tax cuts and more money in your pocket if you make less $150,000.
I think that’s the right way to promote the kind of bottom-up economic growth that’s going to make a difference in people’s lives.
Here is how the government tabulates two different types of mid-point incomes in America. The Census Bureau calculates median income (the precise mid-point between all tabulated incomes) and the mean income (the average of all the tabulated incomes) of families and individuals. The figures below are for families and individuals for 2006.
(Source: Census Bureau: Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006, http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf and Current Population Survey: Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement, http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/faminc/new07_000.htm)
(Source: Census Bureau: Income, Poverty, and Health Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2006, http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf and Current Population Survey: Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement, http://pubdb3.census.gov/macro/032007/hhinc/new06_000.htm)
So, the question I set before those of you who wish to discuss and debate are these: what is the middle class; are you in the middle class; have you always been there and do you ever imagine you live better than “middle class”; and to what extent does your conception of “middle class” affect your view on how high taxes should be which income category.
Let the discussion and debate begin.
This goes too show how Obama is out of touch with people and how real people are hurting My Hubby and i have worked hard all our lifes and worked over time every chance My hubby got and we have never made a hundred and fifty thousand We was lucky too make Fifty thousand and My husband was a first class welder then in 1988 got hurt really bad that disabled him for life now we live on 1400.00 a month from SS WISH oBAMA WOULD TRY LIVING ON THAT A WHILE THEN HE MIGHT SEE WHAT LIFE IS ABOUT
O.k., now we see how Obama is waffling on what the definition is for middle class. Notice how he started off saying $150K is the top of the middle class scale, then he said anything above $250K would see tax increases…leaving the range between $150K to $250K as GRAY ZONE.
So in political speak that’s the range that he’s not willing to call middle class but if Congress decides to raise income taxes on that range…he can say the Obama Administration didn’t raise taxes on the middle class, Congress did….
In my book whatever the end of one range is the beginning of another. So the Obama camp is trying to dodge the tax increase question on “upper middle class”. So here’s my take…
Upper Middle Class won’t participate in tax rebates, they will instead see increased fees, reduction in income tax deductions, and they will see a net reduction in comparative net take home pay in effect penalizing income earners in this income range.
I fall on the low end of the GRAY ZONE as a single income home, three kids in college, I don’t flip homes so I am very conservative with my finances and with the exception of my home mortgage, I don’t buy anything I can’t pay for and each of the family member’s cars are paid for. So far I have been able to fund two of my three kids college but I will have all three in college next year and its a struggle even with my income.
That said, in my book I am already penalized for being in Obama’s GRAY ZONE. ANY tax, fee increases, loss of tax deductions which are few and far between these days (e.g. I don’t qualify for ANY college tuition deductions), would be seen as a tax increase. As it is right now, any money that gets freed up after I reach my annual Social Security tax cap goes to offset college expenses for my kids.
So to net it out, since Obama is GRAY about my economic status, I can only surmise that he and his colleagues has every intent to jack with my income and those in the same category as myself. After all, these guys are liberal tax and spend bureaucrats that get elected by handing out pork based on tax revenues. These people have vast sums of wealth and lifetime retirement benefits that dwarf anything the average American worker will ever see.
My fear is that Obama has reached his place in this election process not just on his oratory skills and good looks but rather, political favors he will have to repay once in office. After all, he is part of the Chicago political engine.
I don’t care what class you consider yourself to be in!
Nobody should pay more than 10% of their income to any government entity, ever!
Talk about another Obama double talk!! If you make more than $250,000, you will get taxes raised. If you make under $150,000 you will not get a tax increase. Mr. Obama, how did you explain Middle Class?? Makes no sense, what happened to the people making betweeen $150,000 and $250,000, what class is that??? This interview proves you don’t know what the heck you are talking about!!!
As far as I am concerned I would be willing to pay a flat tax provided EVERYONE was paying the same amount. I like Huckabee’s support of the Fair Tax concept because it would effectively take away any vehicle for bureaucrats to play class warfare to buy votes by pitting one income bracket against another. It would also eliminate the people milking the system and it would force spending restraint as well as eliminate all of the cottage industry tied to dodging taxes. After all, if you see how these guys (Congress) fleece the American taxpayer by taking tax revenues and “earmarking” them for their political favor payoffs, you can quickly see how they have gotten drunk with our money. It is, after all, the seed that corrupts many of these guys – they use our money to build their wealth…and we pay continue to pay for their lush lifestyle even after they are out of office…I don’t begrudge people that want to serve our country but if I am going to pay for their retirement I want accountability while they are in office and if they haven’t served us well, we deserve to rescind their retirement benefits. We need fiscal responsibility in Washington and we need it now. We do it, why don’t we hold them accountable (with consequences).
Obama is even more dishonest than most politicians!
You would think that people who have gained affluence in this country would want to give a little more back to their country. But no, they are too selfish and would rather let the country suffer than to pay a little extra tax. These same people have no appreciation for the less affuent military staff that protect their freedoms. You can be sure none of their family members are on the ground in Iraq.
Obama says the deficit is around 400 billion, WRONG! The deficit is more like 800 billion. Obama if elected is gonna tax the hell out all the hard working Americans just to give our money to illegals for college and to the welfare who are too lazy to get a job and live off the system. I am sick of this empty suit that America is falling for. The Dems are so deperate to have control of the Presidency again that they vote would put a socialist in power , even if it means the demise of our country. Wake up America!
Michael in Atlanta…..everytime you post, you prove what a dumba$$ you are. The affluent already pay the bill in this country. Have you ever earned $30K or less? I have and I got a full refund. Now that I make 6 figures because I busted my a$$ in law school, whiners like you want me to pay even more because others have no motivation? Socialist f*ckstick. Check your facts before you spout your Daily Kos headlines.
Bottom up economic growth? This is another “slogan” Obama likes to throw around. It’s a platitude…nothing new for Obama. Can anyone tell me where this model has worked more successfully than what the United States has offered till now? The socialist framework of “bottom up economic growth” that Obama is offering means higher taxes, lower quality healthcare and frustration to business.
I’d like Obama to explain to me how the store clerk, the kitchen hand, the factory worker can create and determine how business is to expand and profits perpetuated thus in turn benefitting the company and it’s employees, when business is now (under Obama’s bottom up plan)essentially eroding it’s profits and dealing with more taxes and regulations. The business owner will simply hire less workers and staff or offset the cost to the consumer. Business will also delay expansion until better tax and economic conditions come around. This is an established pattern. Why is Obama asking us to believe his plan is “different”?
I’d like Obama to tell me why his handouts aren’t going to sink the current $400billion deficit further because his proposed spending is heading into the trillions and without comprehensive tax increases, his proposals aren’t even attainable. File under more Obama platitudes perhaps? Just tell the voter what he wants to hear? Or stubborn adherence to socialist ideals without regard for consequences to the very infrastructure he’s demonising?
I’d like Obama to explain how his taxing and over-regulating business won’t drive business into other states or even overseas…thus creating further unemployment. The pattern for this is already established.
I’d like Obama to explain what’s going to happen to income earners in his “grey zone” between $150K and $250K, because his tax hikes to over $250K alone simply won’t meet his proposed spending. His numbers aren’t working and if it goes the same route as previous occassions, the middle class will be picking up his handouts deficit.
Bottom up economic growth Senator Obama? Bottom out more like it.
Most of you have no idea what you’re talking about. Try reading the article and having some sense of context before you make incoherent comments.
-If you make more than $250,000 your taxes will go up
-If you make less than $150,000 your taxes will go down
-If you make between $150,000 and $250,000 your taxes will NOT CHANGE
Greg C. – The flat tax is a scam that the wealthy push onto the uneducated because it is easy to understand. It is not a sound policy; most economists believe that a flat tax would cause any modern economy to rapidly collapse.
givemeabreak – The 2008 deficit was projected at $407 billion, close to the number Obama stated. The number was just raised to $490 billion on Monday. These numbers do not include about $80 billion in Iraq War costs, so you could make the argument that the real deficit is $580 billion, but you’d still be WRONG. And the rest of your comment is completely ignorant; we need taxes for our way of life to continue. In fact, we need higher taxes.
If the Bush administration were a family, it wouldn’t even be middle class – it would be bankrupt, and yes, on welfare.
Michael – First, the affluent people of America already provide 95% of American’s tax revenue so their need to give back has already been done. I don’t call them selfish, I think they are tired of footing the bill for everyone to have these freedoms. Note: I am not wealthy, nor am I middle class yet ($<30K/yr)…I will keep working hard and honing my potential so that I can keep moving vertically through our class system.
Okay, to the topic…
Obama wants to use a “bottoms-up approach”…this is just a euphemism for wealth redistribution. What he fails to see is the Laffer Curve (supply-side economic effect)…which is a euphemism for “trickle-down effect”. If small business are taxed more (typically filed under the individual running the business; note: small business accounts for like 75% of American jobs), and corporations are taxed more, they will pay for the increased costs by doing one or both of these:
1. Increase price on the goods/services they provide. (Only hurts the consumer, not the coporation)
2. Cut jobs. (No company likes to do it, but if demand and revenues are decreased because of #1, then #2 will occur)
In addition, when the wealthy lose more of their income, what do they do…buy less. What does that do, since the highest earners are the biggest buyers…decreases demand for elastic products leaving companies to go back to #1…then, #2. Thus, the vicious cycle is continued…
Tel,
Truth be known, we do not know whether Obama’s proposals will change the direction of our economy.
But we do know under the current administration, jobs are already being lost to outsourcing. We already know that the deficit way above what it was before Bush came into office. And just how have the the Bush tax cuts helped the economy? The economy is not rebounding. We are getting closer and closer to a recession.
The American people are tired of being deceived. They feel the reprecussions inflicted by the failed policies of Bush. Except for a few die-hard conservative, who give a blind eye to Bush’s failures, The American people welcome any change in the direction we are headed.
Andrew,
As a Obama detractor, I doubt seriously that you make less than 30K per year for Obama’s proposal favors you. Additionally, your quote of 95% of tax revenue from the affluent is suspect as well.
Also, if you increase the tax on affluent it only effects what money they have in their savings.
If you increase the tax on the non-affluent it effects their spending.
There are far more people who are not affluent that will spend their money to stimulate the ecomony, if their taxes are lower.
Michael….go take economics 101…..BO’s proposal won’t help anyone making less than 30K per year b/c they already DO NOT PAY INCOME TAX. IDIOT
Comment by Michael in Atlanta said…
July 29th, 2008 at 4:30 pm Tel,
Truth be known, we do not know whether Obama’s proposals will change the direction of our economy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actually Michael, we do know.
A resounding number of economic commentators predict Obama’s spending and tax proposals will spiral this country down into a harder economic downfall. Obama can’t even clarify his social security plan.
It’s not Bush that has driven business out of states and the country, it’s taxes, unions and over-regulation. Bush isn’t the boogie man and simply invoking his name doesn’t change why business left. Guess what Obama’s proposing? Taxes on “green house” emissions, taxes in profits he deems too high, even MORE regulation….it’s a perfect storm.
Case in point, the Democrats keep touting “10 years” (they like timetables) as a defense against the Republicans’ “drill and explore now”. It’s actually legalities and regulations that cause the great delay for the refined oil to get to the consumer. It is quite realistic to state that with sensible deregulation, the same oil will get to the consumer in a year. Ideologues like Nancy Pelosi and Obama put politics before the people. They’re playing the clock out to make sure their party is in the White House, at the expense of the people.
McCain is a fiscal conservative. He’s for spending freezes and sensible regulation on business. I don’t entirely agree with him on climate change, but that’s a minor quibble compared the to the potential damage Obama will cause with his “bottom up” theory,hand outs, tax hikes, and over-regulation (and the BIGGER government that comes with it all). Again, I invite anyone here to offer where Obama’s theory outperforms the practices of the U.S.
i make 35 per year. after my bills are paid each month i am left with about $300 to buy food, gas and whatever the kids may need (clothing, school supplies etc). very tough for this single parent. am i middle class, no. i consider myself to be in the class known as the “working poor”. probem is that should i make more, the govt will take more. cant get ahead no matter how hard i try. guess those college degrees really are worthless. shame.
No matter what Obama says, Congress will see to it that anyone working for a living will pay more to fund healthcare, education, housing ad nauseam for our illegal sponges.
Tel,
Do you have some magical crystal ball that tells you whether any of our candidate’s proposals will work? You cannot know the things you support will work. We do know what we have is not working.
Let us consider Obama’s definition of “rich” and those who will bear increased taxes under his administration. The word implies that one’s wealth was somehow inherited or acquired by means other than plain old fashioned WORK. That it is somehow undeserved….
Those making over $250,000 are largely “successful” rather than “rich”. They have worked hard for their success, either by getting and paying for an expensive education, or worked many hours in small business to make their own success. These are the people that provide jobs and professional services to our population. They have suffered many expenses and paid many bills to get where they are at. And they deserve their success and should be referred to as “successful” rather than “rich”.
Our tax system is supposed to reward and encourage desired behaviour, and penalize undesired behaviour. When Obama taxes the “successful”, and rewards those that are “unsuccessful”, i.e. those that cannot pay for their lifestyle, what does that say about where he wants our society to go???
Attempting to redistribute the wealth to achieve a society that is built on the lowest common denominator will not, in my opinion, be the path to success in our country.
I’m so sick of hearing that 250K is wealthy…I currently pay, on my 250K a year almost 60% to taxes between Federal, FICA and state. I worked 3 jobs and paid for my college, I then made strategic business decisions and did without, sometimes food, and in the last 5 years, my business has FINALLY taken off after 25 years of struggle and Obama the communist, wants to take what I’ve struggled for for years. It’s nothing short of robbery to take 60% of what anyone makes. And I’m not wealthy..I don’t qualify for any type of help and most of my tax deductions are phased out, so I pay taxes on every penny I make, I pay my kids tuition because we don’t qualify for any type of loans or grants. Wealthy means you don’t have to check your checkbook before buying and I check mine weekly. I am, in my community, solidly middle class. And I’m sick of this “working Americans” thing, too. I WORK!! 80 hours a week most of the time, so here’s my news flash for Obama…raise my taxes and I’ll quit working and producing so much. After all, why should I work my butt off, 80 hours a week, if the government is just going to take it. Think I’ll cut back and work 6 months a year so I can be in the 150K range. I’m tired of paying more than my fair share, being tired all the time to support my family with no government help…Would be better and fairer if the first 25K of everyone’s income was tax-free and after that, it’s 10% or whatever across the board. You make less you pay less, you make more, you pay more and it’s a fair distribution. Obama’s plans will destroy our economy.
Comment by tool time
July 29th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Michael….go take economics 101…..BO’s proposal won’t help anyone making less than 30K per year b/c they already DO NOT PAY INCOME TAX. IDIOT
################################################################
Obama is proposing tax increases only on those who can afford to pay more. The does favor people who make less than 30K.
I suspect you and Andrew feel that you do not need to give anything back to the country that has allowed to acquire your wealth. All you are concerned with is gainning more wealth. Additionally, not all people who make 30K, get a tax refund. There are some like yourself that have a history of weaseling themselves out of paying taxes and leaving the burden on others who cannot afford to pay taxes.
No matter how high taxes get for the rich “successful”, they can afford financial counciling. It’s amazing how many loopholes those little guys find for the “successful”.
So if you are “successfull” and you pay a lot in taxes, you use those little (average income Americans don’t know about, or are unable to use) loopholoes, and get the majority of your taxes back at the end of the year! Most middle income Americans live paycheck to paycheck. We don’t have the luxory of having a little extra money laying around to invest, we own one home, and we are taken advantage of by those that have become “successful” at every financial level of living. So I applaud those that have become “successful”, but just remember, there are those that try and fight their whole lives to do the same, but keep getting chopped down by those that have succeeded.
Michael in Altanta
Why should my husband and I pay anymore taxes? I understand previous comments about the troops giving us the freedom to live comfortably, but as a prior service member I do not fault anyone who makes it ahead in this country.
Father in law – Retired Vietnam Vet – upper middle class – $180,000p/y – after taxes
Husband – 12 years military service – upper middle class – $170,000p/y – after taxes
Myself – 13 years military service – working class- $75,000 – after taxes
Our entire family has served our country first, went to college while in the service and moved on after that. Every year of hard work has finally paid off and honestly, at the end of the year it makes me sick to my stomach to see that $35,000-$40,000++ in taxes were taken from us. Our three children will not qualify for government help meaning that we have to pay for it out of our pocket. Obviously we have a mortgage plus the monetary obligations that come with owning a home. So for anyone to have the nerve to tell me that I have to give more of my paycheck to people to pay for their healthcare, education, mortgage, or welfare makes me want to punch them in the eye.
I’m proud I served my country and proud that it gave me the opportunity to get this far in life. It’s time for the politicians to reward our hard work and service to this country by leaving our paychecks alone.
These people who play on emotion to make you feel guilty about paying more tax need to get a grip. We now work 5 months out of each year just to pay the federal tax. There is never any mention of property tax, federal gas tax, state and local sales tax. If I recall some folks crossed the ocean many years ago to get away from this.
Defining what lower class, lower middle class, middle class, upper middle class, rich, wealthy, extremely wealthy, etc. would be a very difficult riddle to figure out.
Think about what a million dollar earner can do with his/her million dollars!!!! Figure the enormous tax burden to this million dollar earner. Let’s say, 60 plus percent is paid in all the different tax categories. Now, try to define where this individual ‘fits’ in today’s society.
Prior to, even, the early 1970’s, and before, anyone in America making a million dollars a year would have been considered ‘rich’!!!! Now, step into 2008 earning that same million per year. Would you say that this million dollar earner today is ‘rich’??????
Obama’s bumbling, and confusing, comments in the interview cited while he ‘toured overseas, caught him by surprise. No scripted format to look down at – off the cuff, so to speak, shows so very clearly that Obama’s so-called knowledge of economics is extremely limited.
Our household annual income runs somewhere around $125,000 before taxes. Chop off about 35% of that, and where does that put us???? Hum, maybe not even ‘IN’ the middle class anywhere!!! I certainly do not feel rich, and could benefit from some form of tax cut! And, as mentioned by other comments in this forum, those who earn $35,000 or less pay NO TAXES AT ALL. I would think, also as others have mentioned, that ‘working class’ COULD apply, but could POOR BE APPLIED HERE ALSO?
If Obama goes into the White House, those of us who pray will need to be prepared to look heavenly for help. Where will America be in four years of an Obama presidency ??? And, beyond, should he be reelected for another four years, our lives as American citizens will be dangerously close to ruins!!!! Obama’s idea of ‘becoming more like Europeans’ really says, loud and clear, that socialism and worse, are just on the brink of becoming a reality in our ‘NOW – FREE AMERICA’ !!!!
Regardless of your political position, a vote for McCain will SURELY BE A BETTER WAY, THOUGH NOT PERFECT, FOR ALL OF US TO CAST OUR VOTE IN HIS DIRECTION, COME NOVEMBER.
The median income level has been stuck in that area for years, yet the average millionaire’s net worth has skyrocketed. ust more evidence that there is a real effort to destroy the middle class. We will be the “haves ” and the “have not’s”.
Hi Carl,
You better get educated. Anything Comrad Obama says is gospel. This puts him in a place of authority to tell us who can be ‘middle class’ and who can’t. He’ll decide. You report.
“Bottom up” economics, Mr. Obama? Doesn’t sound like a different kind of Democratic party plan to me.
STOP with all the rhetoric about taxes. Do away with the tax brackets. Make everybody pay the same percentage of their income towards their taxes. Say 15% to 20%. It is the same percentage whether you live in an apartment making minimum wage or a mansion making millions. Tax Exemption or tax shelters would not need to be taken because everybody is paying the same. No more loan interest being taken off your taxes. That is part of the price of buying a home. If you want to live there, then you are willing to pay the price to do so.
The government needs to learn to live within their budget and stick to it. Those at the bottom of the scale should not be allowed to be tax exempt, just like those at the top of the pay scale should not be smacked by their taxes.
The Pork in DC needs to stop. If the budget can’t cover your pork, then your pork gets fried. “Special Projects” should be weighted just like we would weight the importance of something that we buy in the REAL world. If it is important enough, it will be contributed to. If not, it won’t.
Simple logic and common sense are rare commodities today, that needs to be recaptured.
Wait, listen? Did you hear that?…Kkkkkrrrriiiiippppp!
If Obama gets into office, that is the sound of your paycheck being cut in HALF!!
Comment by Aurora
August 1st, 2008 at 11:39 am
Michael in Altanta
Why should my husband and I pay anymore taxes? I understand previous comments about the troops giving us the freedom to live comfortably, but as a prior service member I do not fault anyone who makes it ahead in this country.
Father in law – Retired Vietnam Vet – upper middle class – $180,000p/y – after taxes
Husband – 12 years military service – upper middle class – $170,000p/y – after taxes
Myself – 13 years military service – working class- $75,000 – after taxes
Our entire family has served our country first, went to college while in the service and moved on after that. Every year of hard work has finally paid off and honestly, at the end of the year it makes me sick to my stomach to see that $35,000-$40,000++ in taxes were taken from us. Our three children will not qualify for government help meaning that we have to pay for it out of our pocket. Obviously we have a mortgage plus the monetary obligations that come with owning a home. So for anyone to have the nerve to tell me that I have to give more of my paycheck to people to pay for their healthcare, education, mortgage, or welfare makes me want to punch them in the eye.
I’m proud I served my country and proud that it gave me the opportunity to get this far in life. It’s time for the politicians to reward our hard work and service to this country by leaving our paychecks alone.
################################################################
Your husband should pay more taxes because he loves his country. Your husband should pay more taxes because he can afford to. Increasing taxes on your husband does not affect you husband’s ability to pay his bills and keep a roof over his head.
Kyle,
I fully understand the context of this article and Obama’s spin…the reality is he’s proven to me that he will change the message to suit the audience and the time…he can say he $150K-250K won’t change but those are just words…I don’t trust anything he says…at least with McCain he’s been consistent.
[...] a recent interview, presidential candidate Barack Obama was asked to define who, exactly, is “middle class.” Here [...]