Actually, I think the fact that you spend an appreciable amount on keeping, feeding, and maintaining a horse, as well as the fact that you have a "see it-like it-buy it" attitude about dresses is an indication that you could more easily weather a tax increase than most.
Don't recall spending being completely banned by the MMM blog/forum, please correct me if I am wrong. And besides because she can buy a dress she should be taxed more....fuck that. Nevermind that MMM has demonstrated that a family, let alone an individual, can live reasonably well evan at the poverty line. So your argument is a bit disingenuous.
Actually, that wasn't my point at all-- My point is that those at an income level that could be affected by the proposed tax increases, those making $250K or higher PER YEAR (decidedly not middle class), the statistical truth is that those people tend to spend less, not more. The reality is that those driving the "economic engine" with large spending are the real middle class-- under $250K/year in income, and very little savings. An increase in taxes on those who tend to spend less, and need less, is a blip to them. Remember, it's a tax on INCOME, not on wealth. Government agents are not going to break into your house and cart off anything you've already accumulated.
Since those who really fuel our economy with spending are those which *neither* side intends to increase taxes on, the net economic result will be little to none.
If you haven't read The Millionaire Next Door, I highly recommend it. US Millionaires tend to drive old, used cars, drink Budweiser when they drink at all, wear a $30 Timex, and spend very, very little. In other words, they're mustachians.