Apros pos the ongoing what is RICH debate - is Obama RICH? Is Biden RICH?

[Stinky The Clown]

I have no idea what Obama's detailed net worth is, but I am assuming someplace in the two to four million range, tops, because of his books. But again, I;m not sure. He could be worth much less, but surely not a whole lot more.

Biden, it has been said, was the least wealthy Senator when he was a member. His worth is pretty much the house he owns in Delaware and his pension.

So ...... Do you think they're rich? Not worth more than you. That's not the question.

Are they **RICH**?

edit to fix thread title

[BlooInBloo]

1. Sounds like Obama is on the cusp of what I consider rich...

I.e., if he never earned another cent other than interest, would he be able to provide a high level of living for his family?

[Stinky The Clown]

2. A reasonable definition

Refreshing compared to a lot of what gets said here.

[BlooInBloo]

3. Clearly I'm not a "true progressive".

:rofl:

[pnwmom]

11. Not necessarily enough for him to retire at his young age, not at the "high level"

that you mention, especially in a major city. Don't forget that interest rates right now are abysmally low.

However, with guaranteed health insurance for everyone, the definition of "rich" in my mind would be significantly lower.

[BlooInBloo]

13. Possibly not - that's why I said "cusp".

[Beaverhausen]

4. What is Biden's salary as VP? If it's over $200K he is rich

[BlooInBloo]

6. That's just dumb.

[Beaverhausen]

7. Why?

[BlooInBloo]

12. There are a variety of reasons. Probabaly the most glaring...

reason to not consider "high salary" and "rich" to be synonymous is the existence of *expenses*. To put it loosely, you're rich if you don't really care about expenses. This status is certainly held by *some* of the highly salaried, but by no means all.

There's a reason why we have *2* concepts, viz *income* and *wealth*. At a 6th grade level of resolution, the one is the sum of the other.

They're different logical categories. The one is a dynamic concept - a rate (per year, for example), while the other is a static concept (what's on the books right now). But that's a deeper reason, and thus probably best not discussed.

[pnwmom]

14. Because, for one thing, it doesn't take into account cost of living.

And someone else with his income and few assets could be in deep trouble if they were to lose their job or become sick without good health benefits. Someone who doesn't have a lot in assets can't really be considered rich, because a paycheck can disappear tomorrow.

[Stinky The Clown]

8. Is that before or after taxes?

:eyes:

[Beaverhausen]

10. what percent of americans make $200K and above?

[Stinky The Clown]

15. I'm sure you'll be telling me.

[Beaverhausen]

18. jesus christ - what the fuck?

I know there are threads about taxing the rich here right now but I haven't even read them, let alone shown an opinion.

You posted a thread asking if Obama and Biden were rich. They currently make more than what 90% of americans make so, in my opinion, that is rich.

I'm not making a judgement and I'm fully aware that Biden was the least wealthy of any senator. I don't think being wealthy means you are a bad person.

For the record, I live where the median home price is $500K (not that I own one) and I make under 50K. I consider myself richer than most people.

[pnwmom]

16. What percent of Americans work in places where the median home price

is above $500 K? $1,000,000 K?

[madokie]

5. They are both rich in the best measure of a man

Love, love for us, love for our country and the love we have for them both.

[angrycarpenter]

9. I tend to think of Rich as a state of mind as much as net worth.

I have no problem at all with anyone accumulating wealth. How they do it and what they do with it is the problem. I do not think either would have a solid gold toilet or a Rolls or anything that is just a wasteful conspicuous display of wealth. I don't think either would attempt to hide money off shore or treat employees like a disposable resource. They may have a lot of money but I do not think of them as rich.

[terisan]

17. Biden's family members' hedge fund and lobbying activities are troubling, esp re MBNA

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2008/08/bidens-son-a-registered-lobbyi.html

Biden's son, Hunter, has been a registered lobbyist since 2001........

It appears that Hunter and his father have tried to comply with the ethics rules related to family members of lawmakers who are employed as lobbyists. In 2006, Hunter ended his run with National Group, a lobbying-only subsidiary of his firm, in response to new ethics rules requiring lawmakers to prove that their relatives do not benefit directly from the lawmaker's spending or tax provisions. Sen. Biden also supported a new law that prohibited lawmakers' staff from being lobbied by the member of Congress's immediate family members who are lobbyists. A spokesman for Hunter told USA Today that he never lobbies his father and does not "share in fees from clients on whose behalf Sen. Biden has been lobbied by other firm partners and employees."

Despite this, the Bidens have not avoided controversy altogether surrounding Hunter's career. Hunter and Sen. Biden's brother, James, have been accused in two lawsuits of defrauding a former business partner at a hedge fund. The partner says he was asked to set up the hedge fund, Paradigm Companies LLC, and to make Hunter president, in response to Sen. Biden's concerns that Hunter's role as a lobbyist could affect his presidential bid (which he ended up dropping in January). Hunter has said his father had nothing to do with the deal, which went sour.

In addition, prior to working for National Group, Hunter was the senior vice president of credit card company MBNA Corp, which also happens to be Sen. Biden's largest contributor over time. The company has given the senator $214,100. At least 13 of Biden's employees have taken a similar spin through the revolving door between the public and private sectors.

[Warpy]

19. The right wing has relabeled the classes in this country.

What used to be destitute is now called poor.

What used to be poor is now called working class.

What used to be working class is now called middle class.

What used to be called middle class is now called rich.

What used to be called the rich is now invisible, hiding behind a totally separate infrastructure than that which is used by everyone else, and why that public infrastructure has been allowed to crumble into disrepair in the name of making them richer and more invisible.

Neither Obama nor Biden is rich. Both are middle class, able to access the rich man's infrastructure only as a guest.

Any discussion of class politics has to start here with the callous relabeling the GOP has gotten away with for the past 40 years.

[leftstreet]

21. ^^Excellent post^^

Although I'd say starting with Reagan, the Dems have been just as guilty of that new labeling.

[Stinky The Clown]

23. Brava!

Well said

[NoPasaran]

20. Robb is a rich dingbat!

[LWolf]

22. Other: define "rich."

"Rich" is a subjective measure, and is interpreted differently by different economic classes.

What percentage of the U.S. working age population make less than Obama? The same? More?

What are the numbers?

[JackRiddler]

24. They're obviously power elite...

which is the operative command group of a few thousand active super-rich, corporate managers, political officials, generals, foundation and wealth managers, and key policy makers, for the most part recruited by (and mostly from within) the ownership class (about the top 1/2 percent).

And yeah, they're on the lower levels of rich. Is this hard to understand? Is it wrong somehow to acknowledge the objective reality?