HENRYs = high earners, not rich yet

Great article I came upon today. Even though I don't know these people, and they make mad money ($250K-500K) and am jealous of them, at the same time I feel sorry for them.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/24/magazines/fortune/tully_henrys.fortune/index.htm

Associated gallery of five families:
http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2008/fortune/0810/gallery.tully_henrys.fortune/index.html

Watch the gallery first and then read the article.

Nice graphic:

10/29/2008 6:00:01 AM

I'd say this kind of belongs in the "Middle Class" thread, but a good read nonetheless.

10/29/2008 6:09:53 AM

I was going to put it there, but then decided against it. Obviously, HENRYs are upper middle-class people, not middle class, even though [some of them] might be living like middle class people.

10/29/2008 6:22:18 AM

It seemed like the biggest factor (besides taxes) that kept the HENRYs mentioned in the article in a middle/upper-middle class lifestyle was their child expenses... correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think it mentioned in the article just what percent of the households in the 250k-500k tax bracket had children, or the average number of kids for people in that group. I'm curious to find out if a majority of those earners are HENRYs, or if the HENRYs are simply a subset of that tax bracket that decided to build a family.

10/29/2008 6:28:46 AM

Terrible article. You're making 500k and worried about money still? I've got news, it's not because you don't make enough or are taxed too much, it's because you are a moron.

10/29/2008 7:26:13 AM

OMG I need a tax break so I can pay 15,000 a year to put my kid through high school and send them to cornell.

stop whining, you still have it better than oh 90 PRECENT of the population.

10/29/2008 8:59:04 AM

Im sorry but this is some self entitled bullshit.

you live in the USA. You're making 287k a year. Im sorry you have to pay some taxes to keep the government running. Regardless of how much we need to clean up dumb government spending you're still going to be spending some cash to keep this big boat afloat. Dont bitch about how people making 21k are only paying 6% of their earnings on taxes because theres no way in hell someone making 287k would lower themselves to making 21k even to prove a point. Because making 21k a year blows ass.

10/29/2008 9:08:09 AM

thats not the point!!!

its amazing how some of you miss the crux of it. who are you to tell anyone else how to spend their own money? why is the pool of people who pay the income taxes in this country shrinking while the pool of people voting themselves out of the tax burden growing? ridiculous!

10/29/2008 9:08:52 AM

no one is telling anyone how to spend their money.

the government is taking some of that money to assist in the well being of the country.

like 700 billion dollar bail outs.



also the idea of government is to take from people and tell them what to do. We really don't own anything or control ourselves. They can easily take your land and home to build a highway with little problem and then throw you in jail for smoking pot.

[Edited on October 29, 2008 at 9:22 AM. Reason : !]

10/29/2008 9:21:29 AM

Yeah, I totally sympathize with this article. If I was making that much and that much was getting taken away from me I'd be pissed off too. Besides, why are some of you hanging them for sending their kids to decent schools. Who wouldn't prefer to send their kids to a better school if they could afford it?

What's really unfair is these guys are paying the largest portion of taxes, yet they are the least likely to use the government programs/goods that those taxes paid for. The more and more I get into it, the more and more I look forward to a flat/fair tax.

[Edited on October 29, 2008 at 9:37 AM. Reason : meh]

10/29/2008 9:37:12 AM

Actually I think its great they are saving and sending their kids to good schools and whatnot, but its not like its putting them in the poor house. They still end up with more money than most of the American population makes.

If you just focus on the fact that they're not actually rich as the article states....well yeah they're not rich. Like has been said they're more like upper middle class. Either way I sure as hell don't feel sorry for them as the OP does.

10/29/2008 9:54:30 AM

I don't feel sorry for this group. As the world does not yet support such levels of consumption for everyone, they need to tone it down for now.

10/29/2008 10:05:47 AM

Quote :

"Besides, why are some of you hanging them for sending their kids to decent schools. Who wouldn't prefer to send their kids to a better school if they could afford it?"

If they can afford it then why are they complaining?

Quote :

"What's really unfair is these guys are paying the largest portion of taxes, yet they are the least likely to use the government programs/goods that those taxes paid for. The more and more I get into it, the more and more I look forward to a flat/fair tax."

Whether they use them most of not, they still profit the most off of most government programs.

10/29/2008 10:08:51 AM

100% of my taxes goes towards welfare!

RUSH TOLD ME THIS!

10/29/2008 10:14:54 AM

Progressive income taxes really slam young families as they go through their most productive stage of their economic life...when they need every penny to raise their kids.

10/29/2008 10:54:36 AM

people should get use out of their taxes and send their kids to public school so they dont turn into gays.

10/29/2008 11:01:07 AM

dude, take your schtick to shit shat already.

10/29/2008 12:57:27 PM

whiney bastards

according to top poster's article, someone making 250k now pay 18% of AGI instead of 16.5%...

[Edited on October 29, 2008 at 1:37 PM. Reason : ]

10/29/2008 1:19:06 PM

Quote :

"OMG I need a tax break so I can pay 15,000 a year to put my kid through high school and send them to cornell. stop whining, you still have it better than oh 90 PRECENT of the population."

shut

the

fuck

up

and

welcome

to

capitalism

you

commie

pinko

10/29/2008 1:24:33 PM

lol the thing is they still have enough money to do all the stuff they were going to do. its their disposable income thats being taxed. money they don't need. if i make 500k 200 k is taxed well i still have 300k. thats more than enough to do whatever you need to do even if you have five kids.

theres a problem in the graph at the top

it has the 540k bracket paying 34 % and the top bracket paying only 20%. it goes 19% 20% 34% 24% then 20%. must be a typo somehwere.

10/29/2008 1:29:19 PM

Quote :

"the government is taking some of that money to assist in the well being of the country. "

lol

10/29/2008 2:17:25 PM

yeah maaaaaan

nice roads and paying for wars is for suckas!

10/29/2008 2:25:45 PM

Quote :

"shut the fuck up and welcome to capitalism you commie pinko"

way to be all melodramatic. Would you prefer it be every man for himself? Cause I'm pretty sure you'd go without a lot of things you take for granted in your everyday life.

10/29/2008 2:36:26 PM

um .. what?

10/29/2008 2:39:04 PM

i'm saying unreasonable drible because you decided to fly off the handle and start throwing names.

make more sense now?

10/29/2008 2:42:05 PM

throwing names where appropriate




youre philosophy is socialistic

10/29/2008 2:45:42 PM

Quote :

"yeah maaaaaan nice roads and paying for wars is for suckas!"

if all the fed did was pay for road upkeep + military i would love it.

10/29/2008 2:47:50 PM

Calling me a commie pinko is not appropriate. All I said was that they shouldn't bitch and whine like they're going broke. They're still able to provide very well for their family.

And give me a break we don't live in a strictly capitalist society.

10/29/2008 2:51:01 PM

we are

and not for long

10/29/2008 2:53:25 PM

your rights to use the word socialist and communist should be revoked since you don't even know what those words even fucking mean.

10/29/2008 3:00:04 PM

i do buddy

i do

10/29/2008 3:00:48 PM

yet, you cannot even use either of those two words properly.

10/29/2008 3:09:58 PM

10/29/2008 3:11:03 PM

just roll your eyes, you mongoloidic trogolodyte

10/29/2008 3:12:31 PM

Quote :

"we are and not for long"

no we arent

If we were purely a capitalist society, then we wouldn't be taxed and those taxes go to pay for social programs that we all don't take advantage of. The redistribution of wealth would be strictly free will purchases of goods and services (or charity). A socialist society relies more on taxing and nationalizing to redistribute wealth.

so while we are a primarily capitalist society, we already have socialist tenants in place and have for a long time.

we just happen to just be moving towards more of a socialist society.

10/29/2008 3:14:42 PM

Quote :

"just roll your eyes, you mongoloidic trogolodyte"

10/29/2008 3:16:55 PM

People saying that their disposable income is being taxed -- that which they don't need... yes, you're correct, but essentially what's happening is that they are living only a marginally better lifestyle than their middle-class peers in the <100k brackets, yet they are (by monetary standards) about three times as successful, and they're behaving intelligently through savings. To a certain degree, it's like being punished or singled-out for being well-educated and successful. Yes, they're still living a comfortable life, but so are a lot of families making 1/3 the income. These people are some of the most highly-trained and well-paid in their fields, but they aren't living a lifestyle that reflects that. Sure, the income being taxed is mostly disposable, but don't most of them deserve it? Going through college for engineering, med-school, or law school, which are generally recognized as fields with the most time/effort/intelligence/money invested into them, and yet ending up with a lifestyle that is virtually the same as that of someone with a far less investment-intensive degree program? I'm not saying they should pay the same as the people in lower brackets, but they certainly deserve more than what they're getting.

I don't have much problem imposing higher taxes on the 500k and over brackets, chances are most of them are living off their accumulated wealth and investments than they are their work... and if they're not, they soon will be if they act smart. Yes, they deserve their earnings too to a certain degree, but at the point where their money makes more money for them, they've stopped doing the work.

10/29/2008 3:18:02 PM

^ while they might be living the same lifestyle today as someone making 1/3 less than they are, I'd bet that the person making less won't be so prepared once they hit retirement. The extra income is giving the "richer" people the ability to enjoy that lifestyle a lot longer. The person not making as much will most likely have to work longer and harder to keep that lifestyle or go without things.

not to say they should be punished, the point is I don't think they really are being punished, at least not the point where they should receive sympathy. (again referencing the OP's comment of feeling sorry for them)

10/29/2008 3:24:14 PM

so when are all the bible thumping, no tax wanting conservatives going to move to Ireland?

better stay outa the catholic areas tho because you'll get yrself killed.

10/30/2008 8:25:02 AM

Quote :

"To a certain degree, it's like being punished or singled-out for being well-educated and successful."

You're confused. Even if they were limited to exactly the same income as everyone else, that wouldn't be a punishment. If I smacked them upside the head with a rock, that would be a punishment.

10/30/2008 1:08:33 PM

your not in a vacuum.

10/31/2008 9:32:32 AM

These people are easy targets for politicians. At $250k - $500k, they don't donate enough to wield any real power, but they're just rich enough to be soaked by the tax code. Say what you will about the moral implications etc etc, the real reason they get taxed the way they do is because they're politically expendable.

10/31/2008 12:13:01 PM

the burden should be shifted up a little more

however i had one observation:

Quote :

"Nor does he appreciate being branded as "rich" when it's far from certain he'll ever build the kind of lavish nest egg the truly wealthy enjoy, especially after the current market meltdown."

even with his tax burden he should be able to build a very comfortable nest egg. too many people are living beyond their means and borrowing too much money, that's hurting them a lot more than taxes are.

10/31/2008 12:29:39 PM

If it helps any of you appreciate the situation, stop imagining some guy bitching about the poor. For some of the folks I know, it isn't about having to pay for the less fortunate. It's about having to pay for the more fortunate.

Take the war in Iraq, for example. Really wealthy people get even wealthier off that shit. The super wealthy are more likely to profit off the war and are more likely to have access to tax shelters and the like to avoid paying for it. So everybody else has to pay for it...and, yeah, it's a little annoying when the government is like, "Hey, you guys there, yeah you, the architect and the English professor...we're gonna need you to pony up a lot more loot than everybody else. We would make the upper class cover it, but they own us...so...yeah..."

11/4/2008 6:05:27 AM

This thread is full of more fail than usual. The only decent posters are the OP, tromboner950, and BridgetSPK.

11/4/2008 6:13:53 AM

I'm a bit left of center and I do support Obama's tax plan as it has been stated. Still, I think there is a limit to which you can fairly apply graduated income tax. Bearing in mind that people who do not pay normal income tax but earn and spend money are still taxed. There's payroll tax and various sales taxes too.

But the OP does have a point. It is unfair to shift so much of the burdon to high earners that those who are earning decent amounts and comfortably middle class do not carry some of the weight. Luckily, we are nowhere near that with our current tax rates nor with those proposed by Obama. I'm also somewhat suspicious of these numbers, as I know people who make 70-80 thousand and pay much more in taxes than that chart shows. I think they are leaving out a sizable bit of the more regressive taxes like property, gas, and sales tax as well as state and local taxes. It is disingenuous to attempt to argue the unfair burden shift and then only examine federal income taxes. The tax burdon on an individual is a combination of taxes from many levels of government.

Anyways, while I'm for graduated tax rates and even shifting the burden a little more towards the 250k+ earners, I do see the danger in shifting it too far. The first is the risk of creating a system where the government relies almost soley on a very small portion of the population. This becomes a problem because you will reach a point where the top most earners will flee to tax havens like London England. The rates must be kept low enough so that your highest earners still prefer to live where they're being taxed. As long as we keep our taxes well below those of France and other socialist democracies, I think we'll be ok. We sub 100k'ers could still use a little bit of the burdon off our shoulders since many of us are working through college and worrying about rent, food, and insurance. The HENRYs are worried about keeping up with the joneses and keeping their current lifestyles. While I do not pretend to know how they should spend their money, the argument of survival and necissity is a independent of that sort of paternalism.

I need food and shelter and the things I spend my meager grad student budget on while my uncle doesn't really need to buy the new BMW this year as opposed to next. Need and comfort based arguments are perfectly valid, as long as they don't become about entitlement. The rich are well within their rights getting rich and our tax system should not overly hinder that. At the same time we just spent 750+ billion and need revenue- it makes sense to spread that in a way that causes the least pain. That is, a need for increased revenue should not tax the middle class into financial risk in a time when our financial institutions are already dealing with people who can't pay their mortgages. You don't want to push that many more from barely making it into forclosure.

11/4/2008 6:23:21 AM

This is a bit off topic but appropriate for this thread:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36x8rTb3jI

11/4/2008 6:42:49 AM

^^ Learn to spell and you could make a great debater some day.

11/4/2008 6:46:34 AM

A lot of you also don't comprehend that it's the HENRYs that drive our economic growth. As much as we may dislike it, America is a consumer driven economy. Consumer spending is at 70% of GDP and the primary driver of economic growth in this country.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/10/30/the-consumer-abandons-gdp/

By heavily taxing the groups that actually have disposable income we sap that engine and as a result we all suffer. Capitalism is not an egalitarian system, nor was it ever intended to be. As unfair as that may sound, its the best thing that has worked and as a whole when it works correctly it benefits the greater whole.

11/4/2008 6:59:05 AM

im sure fast food restaurants and liquor stores support this Obama plan.|!|!~

AM I RITE!!

11/4/2008 8:51:58 AM