For the curious, here are the net worths of the U.S. presidential candidates, as reported in Ramit Sethi’s blog, I Will Teach You to be Rich:
Taken from I Will Teach You to be Rich.
As one wag put it: “Yeah, Obama’s clearly the one we should be pointing out as the elitist candidate.”
Clearly, I missed out by not watching the director’s cut of Jerry Maguire! But seriously —…
One of the guys — and I do mean guys — who’s bound and determined…
It’s Sunday, which means it’s time for another “picdump!” Here are 118 memes, pictures, and…
View Comments
Yeah, I was hanging down at the bar the other day with a guy only pulling in $991,000. There's no denying he had the common touch though; he explained fully why we're all so bitter an' clingin' to our shotguns an' gawd an' stuff.
@David: Glad to see that you haven't abandoned your defense of the downtrodden!
If The Wealthy Barber wasn't lying to us, a net worth of $1 million is within both yours and my reach (as computer programmers who seem not to have made any crippling financial mistakes) by age 60.
(Chances are, by the time Obama reaches Clinton's age, he might also have her net worth. Money leads to more money.)
However, if you went up to me and asked whose net worth I'd rather have, I'd take McCain's. The First Rule of Money is that in the absence of other factors, more money is better than less money.
And even more money is better. BTW: because I decided on a life of startups and contracting, I've been pathologically shoving every spare cent into paying off the house. Read what you will into that ;-)
Also note that every one of the candidates are pretty close to self-made men, um, persons.
What's interesting is if you take the average per year:
McCain - 0.569 million/yr
Clinton - 0.582 million/yr
Obama - 0.028 million/yr
Rich does not automatically mean elitist, just as poor doesn't automatically mean classless. Neither is universally true.