It's hard to regard this Rupert Murdoch publication's opinions on money as grounded in any sort of reality.
It's amazing that a non-insignificant number of people on HN don't think that's on the high end of the income spectrum. In most places in America, you'd be considered quite handsomely rich if you're making $200,000 a year. It puts you very, very solidly in the top 5% of earners. $300,000 puts you in the top 1%.
That people think that's "contrary to the general portrayal of the American Taxpayer Relief Act" is bizarre. A comic with objectively high income earners making sad puppy dog faces because 1% of their massive income is gone is a sign that the publisher is out of touch with the reality that typical Americans face.
This is incorrect. The source you cite lists the average income by percentile group, which is not the metric one wants - the average income of the top 5% is skewed by the incomes of very high earners.
One actually wants the lowest income in a percentile group; the top 5% started at around 197,000 in 2013.
Source: pg 16 of the 2013 Census income report
https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2014/demographi...