this post was submitted on 07 Aug 2024
3 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19308 readers
2726 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
  • His disclosures, both from his final year in Congress and his time as Minnesota governor, also show no mutual funds, bonds, private equities, or other securities.
  • No book deals or speaking fees or crypto or racehorse interests.
  • Not even real estate. The couple sold their Mankato, Minnesota, home after moving into the governor's mansion, for below the $315k asking price).
top 25 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] jwiggler@sh.itjust.works 2 points 5 months ago (3 children)

That's insane.

Like, no 401k or Roth IRA? Dang. I'm fuckin hard.

[–] dhork@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Their only investment assets appear to be via state pensions, including teacher pensions.

He also retired from the Army, and likely has a pension from that too.

[–] stinerman@midwest.social 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I'm shocked he doesn't have an IRA (unless that doesn't count). Given his previous jobs, it passes the smell test that he doesn't have a 401k.

I'm sure his pensions are invested in a wide range of stocks and bonds, but he doesn't directly hold them.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

Military/feds have TSP, it's essentially a 401k.

If he was 20+ years military reserve he's got a lot in there. I think he started in 1981 tho. And I'm not 100% sure how long tsp has been happening

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

He did 20 some years in the reserves or guard.

That means he has tsp money, it's the government 401k essentially.

I mean, he might not, but it's incredibly rare not to have tsp especially after 20+ years of service.

[–] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

This guy is doing a great job of making everyone realize just how fucking weird the cons truly are.

And I'm loving every minute of that. I've been calling them creepy weirdos for years - after hearing it said on The Professional Left.

I'm glad this guy is taking it to the national level. The Republicans are getting weirder and weirder by the minute and it's about high time someone with a big platform started pointing out what is so obvious to so many people.

How much time have they spent on attacking a woman from a country they probably couldn't find on a map and that is in a sport they now have to suddenly pretend to care about (do they truly care about any women's sports, if we are being honest?). Way to go, guys. People call you weird and you and get even fucking weirder. 🤣

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This guy is doing a great job of making everyone realize just how fucking weird the cons truly are.

Idk if not having a 401k is a sign of normalcy. I think it is illustrative of the state of the Minnesota economy, relative to the hyper-financialized acceleration in states like New York, Florida, Texas, and California. A statewide elected official who isn't a former hedge fund manager or white shoe lawyer is a refreshing change of pace. But when the last couple of years have seen double-digit growth in every major stock index while inflation raced to match, it's honestly kinda scary to imagine a guy who doesn't have any savings in equity.

I hope this is a sign of a politician who hopes to change the underlying nature of the American economy and not just a guy who didn't think to buy in during the biggest market boom since '29.

[–] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Idk if not having a 401k is a sign of normalcy.

It used to be pretty fucking normal until they got rid of all the pensions. That's what Tim's using for retirement instead of playing the ~~casino~~ stock market.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

It used to be pretty fucking normal until they got rid of all the pensions.

And if we're getting a pension-friendly VP, I'm here for it. But I'm still waiting to see what a Harris/Walz economic policy looks like.

That’s what Tim’s using for retirement instead of playing the ~~casino~~ stock market.

My experience with pensions has mostly been through my parents/in-laws. And the experience I've had with pensions is that companies/governments can just kinda take them away again by pleading poverty during a period of historic economic expansion.

Again, I hope Tim's nomination implies a change in direction. But... we'll see.

[–] norimee@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Wow. Does that mean politics is his main job? Like full time?

I didn't knew the US still has politicians like that. Most of the other clowns there seem like they treat politics as a minor side hassle.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I looked at his open secrets page, and his biggest contributes are like 5k, and an association of orthopedic surgeons was at the top of the list.

I'm honestly still shocked we got someone this "clean"

[–] BarbecueCowboy@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I know this is me being unhinged, but when they're that clean, I get stuck on wondering what they might be hiding. I think I'm broken, I can't accept the possibility that he might just be a good dude.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world -1 points 5 months ago

He did speak at an AIPAC conference, but that was like 2010 or 2011.

And while he was a little to pro-Israel at first, he's changed course somewhat. And publicly commented on the "uncommitted" protest vote in his state and said it's a sign that we need to listen to voters.

And hell, after Biden just being open to a dialog makes this guy seem amazing.

Still happy to have him on the ticket. But even if it was Bernie/AOC, I'd still criticize them, if the only pressure on Dems is to go to the right, we can't blame anyone else when the party keeps going right

[–] Hazzia@infosec.pub 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Okay yeah I'm super happy that Harris replaced Biden on the ticket and everything, but the more I learn about this guy the more I want him to be actual president. VP's certainly a good compromise for the circunstances though!

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Everybody in MN has been saying Walz needs to run for president for years now. But, being a relatively unknown guy from a flyover state it was kind of a pipe dream. I'm hoping now that everyone is seeing him, getting to know him, and obviously loving him that he'll get his chance in 4 years to run for actual president.

[–] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Give Harris two terms to cook, but I otherwise I'm on board. The guy seems awesome.

[–] Fosheze@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

By that time he'll be 69. I know that's not unpresidented ~(fully intended)~ but I'd still rather see him as president before he's fully geriatric.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Hopefully she'll win. When she does, it's highly likely it'll be for 8.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Given how Biden stepped down, maybe this could be the start of a new trend. It’s the administration that matters anyway.

[–] MedicPigBabySaver@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

It's not necessary for Kamala. Walz will need to wait.

[–] BallsandBayonets@lemmings.world 1 points 5 months ago

It's not necessary due to age, but it'd be a huge win for the Democratic Party if they encourage her to not seek a second term so that someone actually left of center has a chance.

[–] Moneo@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

If Dems win the I feel like Republicans are gonna have a period of recalibration as they move away from maga politics.

One can hope at least.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I figured so when they lost in 2008, but they doubled (quadrupled) down on the party shit and stuff in 2016 and won.

I have absolutely no expectations they'll start getting introspective and sane.

Which is a shame, having a sane, working-in-good-faith opposition party is - generally - a very good thing.

[–] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

2008 they ran their most honest, honorable, and classy candidate in modern history. And he lost.

So they stopped trying to be honest, honorable, and classy.

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

He lost partly because they added the stupid tea party candidate to the ticket.

Plus Obama was a goddamn phenomenon at the time.

You're right, but still.