In his My Turn column titled Who Are The Rich Jim Selzler asked that a Democrat define who the "rich" are and he deserves a response.

Mr. Selzler was talking about who is going to get taxed and how much at the end of the current fiscal and budgetary debates. Democrats and Republicans alike agreed to hold the tax rates the same for all but the rich and in the end the Ds cave in and agreed to hold steady for the wealthiest as well. Now the Rs want to lower that rate even more. So who are these rich folks?

Both sides of the debate have used the $250,000 per year income as a benchmark for being rich. That is more than six times the per capita income in Idaho but an often overlooked point is that figure is taxable income not gross income. An earner making $300,000 a year with a decent tax accountant is NOT rich by that standard.

No, to be "rich" we need to move up the ladder. The top 400 have more wealth than the bottom 150,000,000 people. Now that is "rich." The average annual household income of the top 1 percent has more than tripled in the last 30 years to more than $1.2 million. That is "rich." And, by the way, the bottom 50 percent of households' income has declined during the same period. That is NOT "rich."

The average after tax income of the top 1 percent is well over $900,000. That is "rich." In 2008 the bottom 50 percent had dropped to $15,000 after taxes. They are the NOT rich. How about we agree that those with a taxable income more than $373,650 are "rich" (the top tax bracket). With a tax code shot through with loopholes benefiting higher incomes, you know that anyone in this tax bracket grosses far more than that.

Mr. Selzler would also like to know how Democrats can justify punishing the "rich." Of course no one is being punished; but some are asked to give more back because this country has been so good to them and has provided them with so much more. The military protects their investments around the world, government funded infrastructure makes their jobs and business possible and profitable, government funded research fuels innovations that make their investments as well as their jobs so lucrative. In short they get more and should pay more.

Finally, Mr. Selzler needs to brush up on political systems, economic systems and the difference between the two. Democrats are as concerned about total government control as Republicans. One difference is that we are concerned about a political system led by the drumbeat of an unregulated free market economic system toward an oligarchy type political system. The U.S. now has a mixed Democratic/Republican political system that fits well with a mixed economic system. Democrats are much more in the middle of the road on both counts than Mr. Selzler seems to believe.

JERRY SHRINER

Coeur d'Alene