The question is, how much income it takes to maintain a “middle-class” lifestyle, or rather, what does it take to buy a house and a car and feed two kids? Most importantly, and what is often not included in the analysis, is the standard of living gets “paid for” on an “after-tax” basis. When we include taxation, it becomes clear that roughly 80 percent of America is failing to support the “middle-class” lifestyle.
The question is, how much income it takes to maintain a “middle-class” lifestyle, or rather, what does it take to buy a house and a car and feed two kids?Most importantly, and what is often not included in the analysis, is the standard of living gets “paid for” on an “after-tax” basis. When we include taxation, it becomes clear that roughly 80 percent of America is failing to support the “middle-class” lifestyle.
The question is, how much income it takes to maintain a “middle-class” lifestyle, or rather, what does it take to buy a house and a car and feed two kids? Most importantly, and what is often not included in the analysis, is the standard of living gets “paid for” on an “after-tax” basis. When we include taxation, it becomes clear that roughly 80 percent of America is failing to support the “middle-class” lifestyle.
没有了， 或者说一两年内就没了。
有道理，可是骗局的目的呢？
就类似愚民政策吧，让大家产生阶级都一样的幻觉，减少福利给底层。那个白人老头教授致力于消除poverty， 觉得福利标准不按地区物价和生活水准计算很不科学，挺佩服他的。他的同学都在花街捞钱。