• 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).
  • ArbitraryValue
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I have been poor enough to be on government assistance and I’m currently in the upper middle class myself, although I don’t have as much money as Walz. I know that his income is enough to live comfortably, and if you reread my last post then you will see that I explicitly said so. But what if he wants to buy his children a house, or pay for his grandchildren to go to college debt-free? He isn’t paid enough to do that without having to save first. (I don’t actually know his family situation but I think my general point stands.) Even if he doesn’t want to do any of that, he could at least donate the money to charity.

    In short, is he going to end up broke because he hasn’t invested his savings? No, definitely not. Is wasting money a good look for someone who wants to be Vice President? Also no.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Is wasting money a good look for someone who wants to be Vice President? Also no.

      It’s a matter of perspective.

      From one perspective, him not actively using his money to make more money is wasting it. From this perspective, he’s going to seem financially illiterate.

      From another perspective, it’s simply him being lazy or incompetent. This also isn’t a good look.

      But, there’s another perspective to consider: it’s him putting his money where his mouth is when it comes to policy. A lot of voters are tired of seeing politicians abandoning their positions in favor of personal gain. If Walz has no investments, he’s in a better position to be unbiased than somebody who would benefit from the financial growth of Boeing, Shell, or some big tech company. Unless he’s corrupt enough to succumb to bribery (legal or otherwise), he has nothing to gain by abusing a position of authority to undermine environmental protections, workers’ rights, consumer protections, etc.