Obama Criticizes Wealthy For Big Houses Before Returning To His $8M Mansion In One Of The World's Wealthiest Neighborhoods
What I'm most embarrassed about here is catching my brain frantically trying to figure out a response to this criticism. Et tu, brain?
Not a great look for Obama, much as I revere the guy.
Not a great look for Obama, much as I revere the guy.
posted by Winston Smith at
3:49 PM
6 Comments:
Absolutely no nuance, sigh. How much do they give away? How many elaborate trips do they take? Do they enjoy their money but work on behalf of others also? Some nuance would be nice.
I will say this:
I imagine that there must be some allowance for the fact that a former President requires a far more secure home location than almost anyone else. That's probably not going to be priced much lower than the figure for Obama's home.
He can be reasonably critiqued for the second home he apparently has, but it's way less ostentatious than the majority of the recipients of his critiques.
^Security detail or purchase property outside of a heavily populated area..are those not more cost effect options?
Also, why the second terrace? Or the in-ground swimming pool? Why does he need *two* secure homes?
M,
Yeah, I absolutely agree that he has to get some leeway for being an ex-president...and a much-hated-by-lunatics ex-president, to boot...
But I agree with CS: there's just no excusing all that stuff. I mean...I'm torn between:
(a) Yeah, ya that rich, do good with that extra
and
(b) It's your $$, man.
I just mean...if you're gonna to down the (a) road...make sure the houses in question aren't glass.
I don't particularly see any reason why somebody can't say "well, I'm gonna really enjoy my wealth for awhile, then I'm gonna focus hard on the charity thing. Or enjoy it, then give a bunch away when you die. Anyway: it's his $$.
I am mostly on the side of "it's his money; he can do what he wants with it." Similarly for billionaires.
I *do* worry about the income gap for a number of reasons, and I think that greediness (of which I believe applies to a large number of billionaires) might be a vicious character trait, but I'm just not sure that anyone is morally obligated to give to charity.
All that being said, my criticism of Obama in this case consists in the fact that he often elects to paint the 1% as "them," when he is part of that demographic himself! This is something I also notice with coastal, liberal elites that really drives me up a wall.
In the end, however, I mostly think that the 1% (or anyone for that matter) gets to do what its want with its money, within reason.
Also, I love Obama..just if that's unclear to anyone.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home