IMO if your point falls apart without two simple adjectives then you have not much of a point to begin with. try descibing your position with only nouns and verbs, the basics. if you need qualifiers (adj. and adv.'s) then you should reconsider the basics of what you are trying to say. cook it down and see what is left. your argument doesn't have much substance without qualifiers, . . . which is my point.

you seem to be overly perplexed by the 200k a year value. maybe you need to expand your search parameters,(if you are using any) but i'll help you out, but only a bit, i'm not good at "drawing diagrams".

200k is widely considered to be upper middle class, this is the point where one begins to have a bit of expendable income, no longer paycheck to paycheck, with me so far?

$200,000: Upper middle class. After retirement contributions, you are left with $177,000 in gross income, leaving you with roughly $125,000 in after tax income. You boost your after tax savings rate to roughly 30%, leaving you with about $87,500 left. By the time you are making $200,000 in your career, you’re probably in your 30s or older and have a mortgage and kids to consider. Kindergarten/daycare may run $15,000-$20,000 a year, followed by $30,000-$40,000 in shelter costs for a reasonable home. You’re left with $20,000-$40,000 to spend on food, travel, groceries, gifts, lessons, and so forth. Not bad.

source: http://www.financialsamurai.com/how-much-income-do-you-consider-to-be-rich/

my point still stands, if one is less than "upper middle class", in other words "barely rich", in other words making less than 200k a year, then voting GOP is against yor best interests.

this well known.