that's funny, we dont feel rich…

You can make a lot of money and still feel like you're just barely getting by. It's all a matter of math and geography...

An article in the Wall Street Journal is highlighting a few families making over $250,000 a year and trying to make a point that whose making more than a quarter million don't feel like they're rich. In fact, one of the people quoted for the story, says she's always thought of her family as middle class.

And that's actually pretty interesting because one would wonder how someone who's middle class makes more than some 98% of the nation. Once you're in the top 2% or thereabouts, you're definitely not middle class, even by semantics alone. Enjoy it, it's a good thing.

Of course you're not going to feel rich because your expenses will rise to accommodate a different lifestyle. If you're living in NYC, LA, San Diego, in Silicon Valley or any upscale community in Hawaii, your dollar isn't going to cover all that much in the first place.

Yet the fact remains that you earn more than the overwhelming majority of people in your country and even though you don't feel rich, when we compare you to just about anybody else, you are. Hence, under the progressive tax system, you're going to get taxed more since the IRS doesn't so much care where you live or what you spend on but what your W2 and 1099 forms say.

Since after the financial crisis and a rise in populism people aren't buying the old argument that those who make the most money create the most jobs and the most wealth, the WSJ is trying to go a different route in advocating against a seemingly imminent 3% tax hike on those making over a quarter million a year.

They're trying to show that instead of buying huge mansions and or half of a Neiman Marcus store's inventory in an afternoon of shopping, the nation's top earners work hard, try to cover expenses and save money where possible. On top of that, they're facing the same dilemma as the whole nation. Inflation is outpacing rises in income by a wide margin, making it more expensive to maintain the same standard of living.

In other words, they present a more realistic picture than the one being painted by pundits and politicos looking to tap into people's anger at Wall Street. But here's a question we need to consider for the next tax season. People still want their roads, social security and military protection. Banks still want multi-trillion dollar bailouts and the government seems powerless to tell them no. Companies still want tax credits and incentives. And we all want a balanced budget.

However, when the government says that it can't meet all our needs and has to raise taxes, we protest. It's all your fault, we say. If you stopped wasting our money, taxes wouldn't be so high (as in the lowest by far amongst all other developed nations). Then, when the government turns to borrow money because we don't want to pay more taxes, we deride it for incompetence and spending that which is doesn't have so it can meet our demands.

In short, we want something for nothing and our criteria for whether we can afford a small tax hike or not, is based on our opinions of our financial situation. Well, at this rate, no one who doesn't feel rich or incredibly charitable should be taxed. The services we expect from our government however, should be still provided. And God forbid they borrow a dime because everybody knows you can't spend what you don't have…