Notice they all use the words "Middle-Class" but will never define it in an exact dollar amount; from X$ to Y$ for a family of four.between the ages of 25 - 45 and X$ to Y$ for seniors above the age of 50.
Did you read the article? Here let me help you:
As we review what we get from ... collecting our taxes a reducing waste, fraud and abuse, investing in education and in initiatives which will bring money into the treasury, it may be that tax cuts for those making over a certain amount of money, $500,000 a year, might be more important to the American people than ignoring the educational and health needs of America's children, Pelosi, D-Calif., said in an interview aired Sunday.
Right there, queen Nancy has defined the upper level of the middle class. The place where more taxes kicks in.
Now do I trust her, or believe her? Absolutely not, but if she can define the middle class as being incomes below $500k per year she may very well get her tax increases.
It gives conservaties a bad name when the Rats define something for us and we don't pay attention and whine that they haven't defined it.
She is a dangerous opponent, don't play into her hands by complaining about something where she has already answered your complaint.
My own recommendation would be to outsmart her and challenge her that if the donkeys will freeze tax rates on all families below an inflation-adjusted $500k per year, reform the AMT so that all below an inflation-adjusted $500k are exempt, and give us a permanent estate tax reform on inflation-adjusted estates of some number commensurate with $500k of annual income, say $3-5 million, we will make it a unaminous vote.
It sounds to me like she has just offered us 98% of what we want on a silver platter. Now we just have to hold her to it.