Obamas placed an offer on 'mega-expensive' estate in Martha's Vineyard: report

[Momto2boys973]

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

What’s it to you or to anyone of us how he spends his money or who he helps out with it?
Do you monitor Trump’s finances as well to see that he’s spending it in ways you approve of?

wonder if he's redistributed any of his wealth to his family in Kenya.

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

[Deleted User 1074]

A couple of paragraphs down:

“You don’t have to take a vow of poverty just to say, ‘Well, let me help out... let me look at that child out there who doesn’t have enough to eat or needs some school fees, let me help him out. I’ll pay a little more in taxes. It’s okay. I can afford it,’” Obama said.”

And he’s right. You can live in wealth and comfort and still help others. You don’t have to renounce to the privileges your income gives you simply because others aren’t that fortunate. If he can afford a big house and a nice car and help others, good. He doesn’t have to live in an apartment in Queens to be consistent.

In that same article you posted, there’s Zuckerberg saying: “Let’s face it: There is something wrong with our system when I can leave [Harvard] and make billions of dollars in 10 years, while millions of students can’t afford to pay off their loans, let alone start a business.”

And yet, these people are smart because they know the solution isn’t for them to stop making money or to have the same economic troubles other have. lol, zuckerberg can donate the majority of his money and still be rich.

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/18/barack- ... n-eat.html

Americans, on average, say that it takes a net worth of $2.27 million to be considered "wealthy," Charles Schwab reports in its 2019 Modern Wealth Survey.

the Obamas' net worth, which is at least $40 million, according to a 2018 GoBankingRates estimate. The New York Post recently pegged their fortune much higher, at $135 million.

there you have it, he can give up at least 37 million dollars and still be wealthy. obama himself seems to think there is a limit to how much wealth one "needs" based on him saying there is only so big a house you can have."

but but, 7,000-square-foot home home with seven bedrooms, eight bathrooms on 29 acres isnt too much house for *him*

[Momto2boys973]

So Trump is part of the problem or is it just the rich democrats?
I mean, maybe for some reason you think being a millionaire Republican is perfectly OK, but being a millionaire democrat makes you a “hypocrite”.
When has Trump ever showed a care for anyone less fortunate than him, except when he decided to insult Baltimore, of course? Do you honestly think that’s a better attitude because it’s “consistent”? So as long as he’s a disgusting, spoiled jerk, he can have his millions and enjoy them? But OMG, a Democrat dares show some caring for others and he’s a hypocrite?
Do you have all their financial info, BTW? Do you know exactly where their millions go, who they help, what they spend them in? No, you don’t. For all you know, they donate and help people much more than Trump does. And at least they bring attention to the problem to look for real solutions, not to just pretend they’re fixing it by living under their means.

these hypocritical democrat multi millionaires and billionaires, pretending they arent the ones who are the problem. pssst... you dont have to wait for a "universal basic income" tax taken from middle class people to solve the problem. give up 90% of all of your money then I will take their crying seriously.

“As the economy evolves, it reallocates resources,” billionaire Berkshire Hathaway CEO Warren Buffett said on PBS Newshour in 2017. “Now, the real problem, in my view, is ... the prosperity has been unbelievable for the extremely rich people.” “If you go to 1982, when Forbes put on their first 400 list, those people had [a total of] $93 billion. They now have $2.4 trillion, [a multiple of] 25 for one,” Buffett said. “This has been a prosperity that’s been disproportionately rewarding to the people on top.”

Mark Zuckerberg, the billionaire founder and CEO of Facebook, has expressed a similar sentiment. “We have a level of wealth inequality that hurts everyone,” Zuckerberg said in his May 2017 commencement address at Harvard. “Let’s face it: There is something wrong with our system when I can leave [Harvard] and make billions of dollars in 10 years, while millions of students can’t afford to pay off their loans, let alone start a business.”

[Momto2boys973]

And again, do you know where every cent of that $40 million went?
So if anyone is a hypocrite here, that’s you. You’re blasting Obama and Zuckerberg for having their money (which they have earned themselves) but say nothing about Trump, who’s like the king of throwing away money.

A couple of paragraphs down:

“You don’t have to take a vow of poverty just to say, ‘Well, let me help out... let me look at that child out there who doesn’t have enough to eat or needs some school fees, let me help him out. I’ll pay a little more in taxes. It’s okay. I can afford it,’” Obama said.”

And he’s right. You can live in wealth and comfort and still help others. You don’t have to renounce to the privileges your income gives you simply because others aren’t that fortunate. If he can afford a big house and a nice car and help others, good. He doesn’t have to live in an apartment in Queens to be consistent.

In that same article you posted, there’s Zuckerberg saying: “Let’s face it: There is something wrong with our system when I can leave [Harvard] and make billions of dollars in 10 years, while millions of students can’t afford to pay off their loans, let alone start a business.”

And yet, these people are smart because they know the solution isn’t for them to stop making money or to have the same economic troubles other have. lol, zuckerberg can donate the majority of his money and still be rich.

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/18/barack- ... n-eat.html

Americans, on average, say that it takes a net worth of $2.27 million to be considered "wealthy," Charles Schwab reports in its 2019 Modern Wealth Survey.

the Obamas' net worth, which is at least $40 million, according to a 2018 GoBankingRates estimate. The New York Post recently pegged their fortune much higher, at $135 million.

there you have it, he can give up at least 37 million dollars and still be wealthy. obama himself seems to think there is a limit to how much wealth one "needs" based on him saying there is only so big a house you can have."

but but, 7,000-square-foot home home with seven bedrooms, eight bathrooms on 29 acres isnt too much house for *him*

[Deleted User 1074]

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

What’s it to you or to anyone of us how he spends his money or who he helps out with it?
Do you monitor Trump’s finances as well to see that he’s spending it in ways you approve of?

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

dont be obtuse. which party supports "wealth redistribution"? which party virtue signals that they care about the poor more than those "privileged" greedy republicans? we all know the answer.

[Deleted User 1344]

"Martha"s Vineyard! I am so jealous I would love to live there.
I am happy for them!

[Momto2boys973]

The obtuse one here is you. Wealth distribution doesn’t mean communism. It doesn’t mean a person has to take the money he made through his own work and just give it away freely. It doesn’t mean wealthy people have to cheapen their work. Wealth distribution means taking measures, like adjusting taxes, so that the ones getting more income can contribute more to society and to help others. It means being motivated to donate to charities that help those that are in poverty conditions.
But really, just giving away cash doesn’t solve the problem. Just as the old saying of giving a man a fish or teaching him to fish. Let’s say Obama keeps a million for himself and goes out the street to throw away the remaining $39 million... and? How did that solve the problem except for giving these people a temporary respite? If anything, it’s counterproductive. It’s a well known fact that people that are just given money tend to not value it and throw it away. Happens a lot with lottery winners, for example. People need to feel they earned their money. So all these millionaires handing out cash just because they have too much of it isn’t a solution.

And again, unless you can prove that they don’t contribute to society in any way at all, then you have no business accusing them of being hypocrites.

As I said, am I a hypocrite for being pro-life or for being against child labor when I’m not opening my home to every poor and unwanted kid out there?

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

dont be obtuse. which party supports "wealth redistribution"? which party virtue signals that they care about the poor more than those "privileged" greedy republicans? we all know the answer.

[Deleted User 1074]

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

What’s it to you or to anyone of us how he spends his money or who he helps out with it?
Do you monitor Trump’s finances as well to see that he’s spending it in ways you approve of?

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

ok 1st of all republicans give more to charity on average than democrats but republicans arent the ones virtue signalling and trying to institute socialism as our economic sytem here. so they are not being inconsistent. they believe everyone ABLE BODIED should WORK HARD AND EARN THEIR OWN MONEY.


Trump donated $102 million over five years.

during the course of his presidency Obama gave away 1 million in total.

[Francee89]

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

ok 1st of all republicans give more to charity on average than democrats but republicans arent the ones virtue signalling and trying to institute socialism as our economic sytem here. so they are not being inconsistent. they believe everyone ABLE BODIED should WORK HARD AND EARN THEIR OWN MONEY.


Trump donated $102 million over five years.

during the course of his presidency Obama gave away 1 million in total.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Almost none of the donations were cash gifts from Trump himself - the vast majority were corporate donations or from his now defunct foundation, to which he made no personal contributions and through which he simply resonated other people’s money.

[Momto2boys973]

That’s not exactly true...

https://nonprofitquarterly.org/republic ... tory-here/

The only fact here is that red states tend to declare more in charity than blue states. But thing is, blue states tend to have higher taxes, which means that the money is indeed used for the general well being. Republican “charity” isn’t really clear on where it ends up- it may end up in Harvard if that means a plaque in front of then,ibrary, not exactly “helping the less fortunate”. I can always claim I donated to “charity”, but if that charity is setting a scholarship program for my kids’ private school, I’m really just helping the slightly less fortunate than me, I’m not contributing anything to wealth inequality.
And Republican charity tends to be this kind of charity.

And what do you know? As with everything relating Trump, what he claims and the reality usually don’t match...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

So this alleged $100 million in charity? Not a cent out of his own pocket. Shocking!!

https://www.cnn.com/2016/03/03/politics ... index.html

And some of the money went poof and no one knows what happened to it! It certainly didn’t reach the alleged charities.

Obama’s million, though? Completely accountable for:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexand ... dac6e3459e

Yeah, I also replied to you on that
Funny how you chose just one isolated phrase to take out of context instead of reading the whole thing.
So maybe for him a “big enough” house is 6,900 sq.ft. costing $8 million For Trump is 33,000 sq.ft. and costing $200 million (at least that what he says...).
So Obama can afford that house, have his well earned luxuries and that doesn’t mean he’s responsible for single handedly supporting every poor person in the world. I can speak against child labor, suggest measures to fight it, it doesn’t earn I have to adopt and economically support every poor child out there.
Economic equality will always be a reality of the world. It’s a fact. And it is on the increase because in a capitalist world, the rich tend to get richer. But the solution isn’t for everyone to just live like schlobs and have the rich renounce all luxuries.
Maybe you prefer the completely consistent Trump, who has never as much as showed any concern for anyone who’s poor and homeless and couldn’t give a crap about them either, so I guess that makes it perfectly fine to own the “best apartment ever built” (his own words) since he’s not being a “hypocrite” by caring for others, right?

Obama on wealth inequality: ‘There’s only so much you can eat. There’s only so big a house you can have.’

lol.

ok 1st of all republicans give more to charity on average than democrats but republicans arent the ones virtue signalling and trying to institute socialism as our economic sytem here. so they are not being inconsistent. they believe everyone ABLE BODIED should WORK HARD AND EARN THEIR OWN MONEY.


Trump donated $102 million over five years.

during the course of his presidency Obama gave away 1 million in total.