How Bernie Sanders, The Socialist Senator, Amassed A $2.5 Million Fortune

[shenmue]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2019/04/12/how-bernie-sanders-the-socialist-senator-amassed-a-25-million-fortune/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2248283719&utm_campaign=sprinklrForbesMainTwitter#3ea97e6f36bf

His book sales amount to 275K for all books combined. Hillary and Michele beat him handily in just their first weeks.

[shanny]

1. oy vey

I remember an old joke about Obama: When they discovered he could walk on water, the RW headline shrieked, "He can't swim!"

[sacto95834]

15. Indeed

By being a member of Congress provides a very generous salary/benefits and places the Sanders in the top 10% of earners I would guess.

Bernie and his wife strike me as rather frugal. Until recently, he sat in Coach class traveling to rallies. He probably saved and perhaps had some investments. He does have 3 homes, but they are in Vermont not San Francisco or New York City; so the cost are probably modest. I think I read somewhere that Jane inherited some funds from her parents which they used to buy a vacation home. Is anyone surprised? While Bernie is doing well by American standards, I do think he is one of the poorer senators, if not the poorest.

[Blue_true]

98. His two Vermont homes are worth over half a million each.

I have friends that live right in the Boston area. A half million still buys a pretty hefty home there, in particular if they live in an outer suburb. Vermont is pretty rural except for Burlington and Montpilier, so a half million home there is a big house. His DC house, even at near half a million isn't that impressive, given the high cost of homes there.

[SMC22307]

170. How much acreage do the Vermont homes sit on?

Isn't one a family home Jane inherited? Hmm, maybe they sold that one and bought a lake house or something to that effect? I don't keep up with the real estate holdings of Democratic presidential candidates but I guess I'm supposed to.

[Blue_true]

183. They sold the home that she inherited, it was a cottage, if I remember the description right.

The cost of acreage depend upon where a person lives and what part of the county the acreage is located in. Here in my semi-urban county in Florida, a city acre runs $20,000-$25,000. In the Orlando metropolitan area, the same acre will run $60,000-$110,000, depending on location. Vermont is very rural except for two smallish cities, Burlington and Montpelier. So an acre there should cost a mere fraction of what an acre in say Boston or a city in southern New Hampshire costs. I sort of know the area a little due to having business there. I would guess that an acre in Burlington costs about what one in my city costs.

[sacto95834]

217. location, location, location

Bernie's DC home must be small-ish. I've been told DC is similar to San Francisco and 1/2 million in SF will get you a very small condo in a iffy neighborhood. Wish I had bought RE back in the 80s. I'd be set.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

2. I'm guessing Bernie is one of the poorest Senators... maybe THE poorest??

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[pnwmom]

12. That would make little sense. He's been in office long enough, at a high enough pay,

to have accumulated some net worth.

The Senate financial disclosure forms would do little to shed light on Senators' relative net worth, because they don't include real estate that isn''t income earning. So none of Bernie's homes would be listed.

Any Senator who keeps more of his assets in real estate than in stocks and other investments would appear to have little in the Senate disclosure forms.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

24. Oh okay, gotcha... not that it should really matter.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[pnwmom]

57. It shouldn't. But Hillary also got attacked for the same thing.

She and Bill entered the WH with very little, because his job as Governor was only paying $32K a year, and she was a partner at a Little Rock law firm.

So they didn't start making substantial amounts of money till Bill left office and they both started making speeches. And I'm sure you remember how much they were criticized for that.

[George II]

160. Normally it would not matter, but most, if not all, other members of the House and Senate....

.....have not continuously criticized others for being "millionaires".

[DRoseDARs]

126. RollCall looked into this for 2018, Sanders was #423rd out of all congress...

With the current reporting of his wealth, he barely misses cracking the 200th place in the 2018 lineup of congressional wealth. They do acknowledge some of the difficulties and problems in obtaining a true understanding of actual personal wealth, but it's an interesting bit of reporting nonetheless.

https://www.rollcall.com/wealth-of-congress

They immediately note they're working on a new analysis and aim for an early 2020 publication of it, so we'll see how that shapes up.

[pnwmom]

128. Roll Call relies on Senate Disclosure Forms which leave out Sanders's three FAMILY HOMES.

Many other Senators have only one home, but more money invested in stock funds, etc. Some members of Congress even live in their offices because they can't afford a second home in D.C.

Sanders apparently likes to invest in real estate, which don't happen to show up on Senate Disclosure forms. I don't know whether this is deliberate or not, but it does allow the democratic socialist to retain that low wealth ranking.

https://www.rollcall.com/wealth-of-congress

Roll Call has been examining the finances of members of Congress since 1990 by combing through their annual financial disclosure reports. This Wealth of Congress study comes from compiling more than 28,000 rows of data from the most recent filings — snapshots of the assets and liabilities of every House member and senator just as their service in the 115th Congress began. (For almost every lawmaker, that’s New Year’s Eve 2016; the seven winners of special elections in 2017 filed during their campaigns.)

Below are summaries for the 431 voting members of the House (there are four vacancies) and the nonvoting members from U.S. territories and the District of Columbia, plus 99 of the senators. (As an appointee, Minnesota Democrat Tina Smith has until May to file a disclosure.)

While these reports open a window into the financial position of every member, they are far from comprehensive or exact. Members need only report their financial positions in 11 broad ranges of value, starting with less than $1,000 and maxing out at $50 million or more. And they do not need to report the values of their principal residences or their contents, the biggest assets for most Americans. Liabilities open during any part of 2016 are also counted.

[Gothmog]

169. This form also does not disclose any of Jane's income

I am still curious about Old Towne Media

[Blue_true]

185. So he was already wealthier that something like 130 Congresspeople.

Now is sits in the top 40ish% for wealth.

[George II]

159. Between him and Jane they've earned close to $6 million since he's been in Congress.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

202. Shame on them!! Right??

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

203. Once again you say something that I didn't say. Not unpredictable...

The point that you miss is that for years he wasn't upfront about making all that money all while criticizing those in the same economic class as him.

BTW, why doesn't he pay his female staffers the same rate of pay as his male staffer?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

206. LMAO!! The English word "right?" with a question mark means I was asking a QUESTION....

that's based on normal English usage and reading comprehension, simply asking do you agree with the preceding statement... if you agree with it, that it's a shame, the appropriate answer is "yes"... if you disagree, then it's a "no." That's how answering a question works... unless you want to AVOID answering it and change the subject, AGAIN, which was certainly understandable. Right??


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

209. Ah, the same ol' dodge, saying something then when it's pointed out as incorrect, claiming....

....you didn't say it. This isn't the first time you've done that and no doubt won't be the last. As for your "question", it's like asking someone "when did you stop beating your wife" - whatever the answer is, it will be assailed.

Nice try!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

213. I thought we were having a SERIOUS conversation... apparently you're not interested.

Based on normal English usage and reading comprehension, asking someone "When did you stop beating your wife" assumes they beat their wife, and if they don't, the correct answer would be "your question assumes I beat my wife... I don't beat my wife." If, instead, the question was: "You beat your wife... RIGHT?" - then the correct answer would be "No, I don't."

You DO see the difference, right? But, if you'd rather dodge answering my original simple "yes or no" question, again, that's understandable under the circumstances.


Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[SMC22307]

171. Poorest, not poor.

His net worth is low compared to say, Pelosi, Romney, Feinstein, Gianforte.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

200. Fair statement.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[stonecutter357]

29. lol

[TheFarseer]

63. According to what I'm seeing

Bernie is the 18th poorest Senator, putting him in the bottom 5th. A number of Congresspeople are in debt.

[Blue_true]

184. I am pretty sure that you are wrong.

Of the Senators in the primary with Bernie, Klobuchar, and Gilibrand are not wealthy at all. Booker may be less wealthy than Bernie. The two Senators from Washington State are less wealthy as are the two from Oregon. The California Senators are wealthy, Feinstein very much so, Harris a little more than Bernie. The Senator from Arizona is not as wealthy, I believe, as are both Senators from Virginia, one from Pennsylvania and Tim Kaine of Virginia. The other Senator from Vermont is not as wealthy as Bernie, as are both Senators from New Hampshire, the one from Maine and one Senator from Massachusetts, and both from Connecticut and Rhode Island are not as wealthy.

[EveHammond13]

3. I'm no fan of Bernie but this article really annoys me

this is the last factoid I would ever care about.

Just release the taxes. On principle. I don't give a damn how much money he does or does not have. I really dislike the "Dems hate success" line of attack that comes from the right.

[yaesu]

6. Agree, plus, circular firing squads will guarantee 4 more years of tRump nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

77. Yes, agreed... the "circular firing squads" need to stop!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[DRoseDARs]

7. Well he is a punching bag daily, so not like it's new.

I just wish he'd go back to being a full-time senator (and one of the most liberal by voting record) instead of doing this thing he's doing again. I really hate when people run for office not for the office itself, but to bring light to their issues/positions/proposals. They become lightning rods, whether deserved or not, and it sours everyone.

*I supported him in Nevada's caucus in 2016, voted Clinton in the general. His time in the presidential goat race has passed.

[shanny]

19. um, to be fair we need to ask

how many of our current 20-ish candidates--many of them in public office now--are running because they think they can win, as opposed to bringing light to their issue/positions/proposals? Should they all withdraw?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

79. Good question!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Kanoko]

122. Perhaps only the "Frontrunners" should stay in the race.

The rest should withdraw and tell their donors to STOP sending them money.

They should do this before any of the debates and before anyone casts a vote.

[SMC22307]

181. That would leave out Tulsi. (n/t)

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

26. Very fair statement... I would only care if a candidate's holdings constituted ill-gotten gains.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[TrollBuster9090]

82. I'm thinking Trump now has ANOTHER copy of FORBES that he'd enjoy being spanked with.

Too bad for him that Stormy Daniels isn't into that anymore.

[samnsara]

129. i agree... this is a stupid article and 2.5 mil is hardly a 'fortune'

[Honeycombe8]

132. Me, too. It's a good thing to be financially successful. He probably has more than $2.5M.

There are things that aren't required to be reported and aren't on tax returns, like IRA accounts.

I sure wouldn't want someone who makes good money and writes books to be in the government, if he can't save and grow his money successfully over decades.

[artislife]

158. "Dems hate success " --Exactly this

These are the same tactics that climate deniers use when attacking Al Gore or Leo or someone Liberal, about taking a jet to places that are far away.



Sanders hates how the ultra rich use their wealth and power against the rest of us. His having a home in DC, ----where he works, a home in Burlington, ----where he raised a family and a week end cabin is after decades of work. He earned his wealth and even if that is a lot more than mine, it is not in the one percent like many in this section declare it to be.

[SMC22307]

174. Good post. Right-wingers attacked...

Michael Moore, Billy Bragg, Al Gore, etc. for having big homes. It's disheartening to see similar attacks by some on DU.

[George II]

239. That "weekend cabin" is 2,000 square feet.....

.....

BTW, to be in the one percent one's earnings has to exceed $421,926 nationally and $321,969 in Vermont. He's made more than double that in each of the last two years, maybe even longer (perhaps we'll find out tomorrow?)

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/27/how-much-you-have-to-earn-to-be-in-the-top-1percent-in-every-us-state.html

He is firmly in the one percent.

Nobody begrudges his wealth, what has people upset is that he has been criticizing millionaires for years all while he may have been one himself.

[lapucelle]

4. Three homes...

?

[shanny]

18. in Vermont

(that second one certainly looks like a mansion)

[lapucelle]

20. One is a row house in DC near the Capitol.

As with many Americans, the bulk of Sanders’ net worth is tied up in his home. Unlike most Americans, however, he owns three. In Burlington, he keeps a four-bedroom, two-and-a-half-bath colonial that he purchased in 2009 for $405,000. Last year, after the hefty book profits started rolling in, Sanders paid off its 30-year mortgage, 25 years early. In D.C., Sanders owns a row house a short walk from the Capitol, which he bought in 2007 for $489,000. Forbes estimates he still has around $350,000 left on the mortgage there.

His vacation pad, however, was paid for in cash. Sanders made headlines when he snapped up a Vermont summer home for $575,000 less than two months after ending the 2016 campaign built on lambasting the rich. Sanders chose a tranquil, four-bedroom, three-bath home with 500 feet of shorefront access on Lake Champlain, 50 minutes north of Burlington. His wife, Jane, told the Associated Press that the couple financed the deal with Bernie’s book advance money, plus some of her retirement savings and proceeds from the sale of a cabin owned by her family.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn/2019/04/12/how-bernie-sanders-the-socialist-senator-amassed-a-25-million-fortune/?utm_source=TWITTER&utm_medium=social&utm_content=2248283719&utm_campaign=sprinklrForbesMainTwitter#3a4fa8236bfa

[shanny]

27. the numbers sound so big, don't they?

But the "colonial" in Burlington looks like a pretty modest place (in fact I live in something similar and believe me, it IS modest--4-bdrm, 2.5 bath sounds...70s-early 80s-ish); a row house in DC near the Capitol can EASILY go for 3-5 Million so half a mil doesn't sound too extravagant (granted he purchased in 2007 but that was before the market--especially that market--crashed); the "vacation pad" was purchased with book money (which wasn't that much, according to the OP) (nothing like sneering at the poor cousins while accusing them of being...wealthy ) and an inheritance. Nuance is inconvenient, isn't it?

why are you linking to Forbes?

[lapucelle]

37. I clicked on the link in the OP.

BS owns three homes, that's a fact.

If your "nuance" is that they only merely very nice homes versus mansions, the fact remains that BS owns three very nice homes.

Why are you sneering at the houses and who are the poor cousins?

[shanny]

39. OK. Then I guess I have to ask why the OP is citing Forbes

and why you followed suit.

[Cha]

40. Oh so now it's down to kill the messenger.

[betsuni]

42. Surprised it took that long.

[lapucelle]

47. Apparently, there will be an an interrogation concerning clicking on links.

[lapucelle]

44. You do that, dear.

[shanny]

93. bless your heart

[sheshe2]

116. If I had to guess?

The article is from Forbes. That is why it is being cited.

I am getting confused here. Is there an issue with Forbes? Are they a RW publication?

[lapucelle]

139. The story about BS's wealth appeared in a magazine that covers wealth, wealth acquisition,

and often includes profiles of the wealthy and their successful business models.

[Gothmog]

147. What is wrong with Forbes?

Forbes is a real publication

[George II]

114. The "inheritance" wasn't really that, Jane sold her share of the Maine house for $150K....

....and the Lake Champlain house was just shy of $600K, paid for with CASH (i.e., no mortgage).

The house in Burlington is 2300 square feet and is worth, according to Zillow, about $450K.

It's not the fact that he owns three homes or the value of them, but he's been pleading poverty for decades and railing against those who are his economic "peers", i.e., millionaires. Remember, he bills himself as a socialist.

[rusty fender]

168. Zillow is not always a reliable

evaluator of the actual worth of homes. They claim that my home is worth way, way more than it could ever sell for. I don’t put much stock in their valuations

[George II]

179. He paid $489,000 in 2007, and it is now assessed by the District of Columbia at $595,000...

Assessments are usually around 80% of the actual value of property.

[Cha]

21. Yeah, because everyone needs 3 homes.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

28. Why should anyone care? Having two homes is typical for out-of-town members of Congress.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[samnsara]

36. hell i had two homes for 4 years. saved hubby from having to commute

Last edited Sat Apr 13, 2019, 06:01 AM - Edit history (1)

...180 miles a day.

[SMC22307]

219. Why didn't he sleep in his damn office like Paul Ryan///?Q!1

[SMC22307]

218. Who are you to determine what people need?

His family and constituents are in Vermont. He has a home in DC since that's where his, you know, job is. You'd rather he sleep in his office like Paul Ryan and other cheap GOPers? (Something tells me if I searched the archives you had plenty to say about that, and it wasn't good.) Jane's pushing 70 and Bernie's pushing 80, why begrudge them a summer place? Her inheritance, his book sales, who cares? It's a nothingberder, just like RWers poutraged over Al Gore's big house.

[sheshe2]

53. Vermont is not exactly cheap.

https://www.zillow.com/vt/home-values/

Market temperature
Very Hot

The median home value in Vermont is $202,900. Vermont home values have gone up 4.3% over the past year and Zillow predicts they will rise 2.8% within the next year. The median list price per square foot in Vermont is $157. The median price of homes currently listed in Vermont is $275,000. The median rent price in Vermont is $1,720.

Yikes. The median rental $1720.

Plus one home is in DC.

[Blue_true]

99. In Vermont a home costing a half million is a mansion.

Bernie has two there at that cost.

[ucrdem]

120. Bernie Sanders' three homes, from left to right

"Bernie Sanders’ three homes, from left to right, in Washington D.C., Burlington and North Hero, Vermont."

From left to right sums it up.

[Blue_true]

191. I wonder whether Bernie has a Bushco cigar boat hidden somewhere?

Maybe that is one of the i's that he has to dot.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

207. Do you have any interior shots??

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[SMC22307]

225. I remember an interior shot... FORMICA COUNTERTOPS IN HIS *MANSION*!

Only on DU would a boring, suburban home be considered a "mansion."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

234. Seriously!! Surprised Bernie hasn't already withdrawn from the race in shame!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Blue_true]

193. You hit it on all notes.

If Bernie won a billion dollar lottery prize, his fans would start defending Daddy Warbucks.

[SMC22307]

216. LOL The middle house in the pic so kindly provided...

is hardly a mansion. It looks like a typical suburban home, nothing special. The third pic shows a roof.

[Blue_true]

220. Then it is either very fancy in the back and inside or someone inflated it's value. nt

[lapucelle]

233. The third picture is an aerial shot to show the property.

Built in 1910, the home has been restored and comes with a large open kitchen. Sitting on 1.13 acres, the home also boasts separate guest quarters and 500 feet of lakefront.

Here's the house and the detached guest cottage.

[SMC22307]

237. Looks pretty rustic...

and a wonderful place to escape to.

[SMC22307]

235. Not really. Here's a Zillow link...

Burlington looks pretty pricey. There's even a 1,686 sf condo for sale for a mere $789K.

[Blue_true]

236. In Burlington proper, meaning the very downtown, maybe.

But neither of Bernie's homes seem to be in such a situation, except the DC one. Again, a $500,000 home in Vermont is a pricey home compared to most of urban New England, urban Florida, most of California from San Diego to a little past Sonoma County.

[SMC22307]

238. This is a mansion...

?itok=uMRCcJxj

This is not. Proper or otherwise... I don't have his address to determine where he is in relation to downtown.

[Blue_true]

240. The top picture is an estate, not a mansion.

Big difference, like two zeros different.

The bottom picture is a McMansion, the very thing that some froth at the mouth about everyday Joes that have a little change in their pockets building.

[SMC22307]

241. Mansion: a large, impressive house.

That was, at one time, a large impressive family home owned by a Seward and Vanderbilt heiress.

These are McMansions:

[yaesu]

5. Great! I'm happy for him. But, to be honest, 2 million dollars doesn't really mean much

these days. I know a dozen factory workers who retired with that much accumulated wealth. pffft

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. Seriously!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[yaesu]

208. Yes, seriously, & I'm not talking 20 dollar an hour auto factory jobs

these are good paying union jobs but probably mid level wage. They work 30 to 40 years, its not hard to accumulate that much wealth if you don't buy into the ameriKan dream crap where you're brainwashed into buying a new car every year or striving to be in the latest edition of Better Homes & gardens. Plus, they have matching IRA's which is a large part of their wealth when they retire

[sheshe2]

76. Wait a second.

yaesu
5. Great! I'm happy for him. But, to be honest, 2 million dollars doesn't really mean much

these days. I know a dozen factory workers who retired with that much accumulated wealth. pffft

Now 2 million is not that much money? Are you serious?

Do you have links to all those factory workers that retire with that type of accumulated wealth? Talk to the workers of the Lordstown, Ohio factory.

[Blue_true]

101. Yeah that post.

Where I live the median salary is around $46,000 per year. A starting cop makes around $35,000 per year.

A person with $2 million can give himself or herself a salary of $100,000 for 20 years, without the principals accumulating one more dime. In my region, that person would be well above the median.

[betsuni]

104. Wait, what about "economic anxiety" and inequality.

I thought those mean neoliberals ruined the economy with trade deals that shipped all the factory jobs to other countries and let Wall St. and corporations decide all the policy in exchange for money. But it's possible for a factory worker to be a millionaire?

That's odd.

[sheshe2]

178. Perhaps they meant factory owners...

and not factory workers.

[awesomerwb1]

118. Hells yeah!

I know a guy who used to push a mexican popsicle cart in LA who retired a billionaire. I kid you not! So hells yeah, $2 million is nothing!

[Gothmog]

8. From my twitter feed

Link to tweet

[George II]

11. I like Charles Gaba's comment.

[Gothmog]

62. Same here

[onetexan]

110. Valid comment

Bernie should explin himself.

[Cha]

14. And again: I have no problem with Bernie earning $2.5 million, or $5 million, or $10 million

Link to tweet

Yeah, seems using "millionaire" as a slur was quite lucrative for BS.

[Me.]

52. It's About Walking His Talk

[DRoseDARs]

124. But isn't that the line of thinking that give us "Al Gore flies in planes and owns a large house..."

...therefore he shouldn't talk about Global Warming." ? I clearly remember those slams against him during the Idiot Son years. Or the more recent slams against AOC for daring to wear clothes more expensive than used trash bags when she showed up in D.C. to begin her term.

Did the $1 that pushed Bernie over the line to officially make him a millionaire suddenly make him not advocate for economic issues? Are people who demand higher wages for others required to live as paupers themselves lest they become as hypocrites? I really don't understand this thinking. Well, from the right I do, they only deal with lies, soundbites and simplistic moronisms, but from the left? What?

This whole bleating about Sanders becoming a millionaire is just so dumb. As if it negated the body of his decades-long political career. Did Hillary's comment about "super predators" negate her accomplishments and advocacies? Duh, no, because that's stupid. It was a thing she shouldn't have said and was taken in a way she didn't mean and wasn't trying to say, but it definitely didn't reveal her to secretly be the Grand Wizard of the KKK. Anymore than Sanders becoming a millionaire from his book makes him part of the Illuminati. Or Gore actually being the true source of most of the world's C02 emissions because he owns a car. Hillary isn't a racist, Sanders isn't a rich elitist, Gore is allowed to educate about and advocate for solutions to climate change.

[betsuni]

127. Al Gore never criticized anyone for being part of the 1%, of being corrupt wealthy elites

beholden to Wall St. and corporations, incapable of caring about the working/middle classes and that only he was uncorrupted.

If Al Gore had complained about rich environmentalists with large carbon footprints while being a rich environmentalist with a large footprint of his own, it would be hypocritical. He did not.

Bernie blames money for corruption. But when he became a millionaire himself, he changed his usual stump speech from blaming "millionaires and billionaires" to just billionaires or "multi-millionaires and billionaires." Otherwise nobody would care at all. That's what people are talking about.

[DRoseDARs]

192. What you posted there makes no sense.

Gore had a larger carbon footprint and more wealth than most regular voters. Those are facts. Conservatives slammed him for that as if it made him a hypocrite. He had personal wealth so yes, he had the choice for a larger home, and his advocacy meant he traveled to speaking engagements frequently. Climate change takes global industrial-level solutions, not Gore opting to bike everywhere and living in a tent. He mostly spoke of taking global action, not barking at every person who drove or had others drive them.

Sanders is barely a millionaire, but has spent his entire career advocating for economic equality. Again, people are slamming him pretending everything he's ever said is null and void just because he's entered the club. It's nonsense.

[Me.]

156. The Bleating As You Call It

is due to his lack of transparency and pointing that finger of criticism at everyone else. Furthermore considering that the combined total from his books is under $300,000 and his Senate salary is under $200,000...how does that add up to a couple of mil in the space of a couple of years? Transparency would put these questions to rest.

[DRoseDARs]

196. Alright, different example: Clinton and her Wall Street speaking engagements.

She campaigned on helping the working class, but when questioned about her speeches in front of Wall Street good gawd were people incensed by the audacity of asking. She advocated for helping the working class, so how was it unreasonable to ask what she said to our blood-sucking overlords? Why was asking for that transparency such a horrific attack? Reasonable people didn't think she was speaking with a forked tongue and reptilian scales showing behind closed curtains on Wall Street, reasonable people just wanted to know how she was selling her public positions on helping the working class to the making-their-living-off-of-the-working class.

Double standards go in all directions depending on who is offended. I have zero interest in defending his reluctance to release his returns other that to posit perhaps in his ham-fisted thinking he was worried about this exact thing, being called a hypocrite for becoming a millionaire, and that it would drown out the message he was trying and has been trying to deliver for years. We all know he's not all that great at dealing with people, speeches in front of them are his jam. (Honestly, wasn't that something Clinton (and Gore for that matter) was also accused of? Being wooden and being more comfortable talking AT people rather than with? She's grown, Sanders hasn't.) Isn't it possible that this was just more of his Mr. Magoo-level bumbling rather than some nefarious plot to ... something? People desperately want there to be and see evil in this man. Why? How is that hatred different from the people slamming Hillary for everything under the sun?

[betsuni]

201. Here's what Hillary says in "What Happened":

"... like many former government officials, I found that organizations and companies wanted me to come talk to them about my experiences and my thoughts on the world -- and they'd pay me a pretty penny to do it. I continued giving many speeches without pay, but I liked that there was a way for me to earn a very good living without working for any one company or sitting on any boards. I spoke to audiences from a wide range of fields: travel agents and auto-dealers, doctors and tech entrepreneurs, grocers and summer camp counselors. I also spoke to bankers. Usually I told stories from my time as Secretary of State and answered questions about global hot spots. ... Sometimes I spoke about the importance of creating more opportunities for women, both around the world and in corporate America. ... Most of the organizations wanted the speeches to be private, and I respect that: they were paying for a unique experience. This allowed me to be candid about my impressions of world leaders who might have been offended if they heard. (I'm talking about you, Vladimir.)

"Later, my opponents spun wild tales about what terrible things I must have said behind closed doors and how as President I would be forever in the pocket of the shadowy bankers who had paid my speaking fees. I should have seen that coming. Given my record of independence in the Senate -- especially my early warnings about the mortgage crisis, my votes against the Bush tax cuts, and my positions in favor of financial regulation, including closing the tax loophole for hedge funds known as carried interest -- this didn't seem to be a credible attack. I didn't think many Americans would believe that I'd sell a lifetime of principle and advocacy for any price. when you know why you're doing something and you know there's nothing more to it and certainly nothing sinister, it's easy to assume that others will see it the same way. That was a mistake. Just because many former government officials have been paid large fees to give speeches, I shouldn't have assumed it would be okay for me to do it."

[DRoseDARs]

211. It's nice to see she gave some personal retrospective on the matter...

And I see the point I'm trying to make about Sanders being made in Clinton's own words about her experience in being flayed over the matter. She had a perspective, and was understandably confused and taken aback by how it was received by the outside world. I believe her that she wasn't up to anything nefarious and I never assumed that she was. I just wish that people on our side would apply the same understanding to Sanders.

Me. makes some good points below but I remain unconvinced Sanders is up to misdeeds. I still think he's just being awkward in how he deals with people and shortsighted and naive in how they react to him.

[Me.]

205. Mr, Magoo Bumbling

I might've thought so but then I started looking into his finances. He portrays, or at least gives off an image, of humbleness. After all, he slept on people's couches for years, stole electricity from his neighbor yadda, yadda, yadda. So I was surprised to find out that he and Jane have been taking in over 30k a month. $14, 500/month Senate salary, $3,825.00/month social security, her SS, plus medical. There was also her salary from Burlington at $160,000/year...$13,333/month. The sale of all his books didn't take in more than $300,00. So that begs the question of where the millions came from. Now they might've been very frugal and it could be they saved, invested so on and so forth. Also, Senators are given approx. 3mil a year for salaries, travel, office expenditures etc, so that wasn't a cost to him. He's sitting very pretty. So I suspect that after dunning HRC for her money he's embarrassed. I wish she had owned up to the fees she collected. Just as I think he's entitled to what life brings him, if it comes honestly, so is she. I am reminded also, that after all the legal fees they had to pay, they were broke and needed cash. Also, the Clinton Foundation has an excellent rating from Charity Watch which means they aren't/weren't skimming off the top claiming administrative costs.

[DRoseDARs]

210. This post is a good example of why I like our interactions and of what discussion should be in DU: P

In any case, I've mentioned elsewhere he won't have my vote again this time around (unless General, but we all know that isn't likely to happen). It's sad that DU had to go through this bickering in 08, 16 and now 20. I don't recall 04 ever being so heated.

[Me.]

221. ...

[betsuni]

61. "The issue is that until recently HE implied that anyone ELSE who did was automatically corrupt."

That is his message, that the dysfunction of politics is only due to money corrupting everybody. The only reason that not all of his fellow legislators support his ideas is that PACs and lobbyists and corporate donors pay them not to. When the money disappears, so will all resistance to progressive ideas (including Republicans -- forget that they vote because of ideology, movement conservatism, the Republican motto of politics as war, evangelicals, racism and sexism and xenophobia, one-issue voters (abortion, guns), the right-wing media empire that makes them despise liberals and fear the apocalypse that will happen if they are not stopped, small government libertarians, etc.). All Americans will joyously flock to the polls.

If your ideology is based on the idea that money corrupts everyone and makes them elitists and you have money, it's a sensitive position. You are not popular with those you called corrupt elitists responsible for all the ills of the country.

[TheFarseer]

68. I'm more interested

In what they do with that wealth. Do they buy and sell influence to try and rig the system so they can accumulate more wealth or do they press for higher minimum wage, free college and healthcare for all? Basically, are they trying to help people or kicking down the ladder behind them?

[Tiggeroshii]

81. He implied they should pay their fair share in taxes

Last edited Sat Apr 13, 2019, 08:14 AM - Edit history (1)

not that they are corrupt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

137. You're being fair to Bernie? Is that allowed?

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[Hassin Bin Sober]

9. Lol at "amassed"

He’s a regular oligarch!

[George II]

13. How many people on this site went from $500K to $2.5M in only two years? You?

And how many people spent two years railing against the "millionaires" while amassing $2M during that time?

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

35. That's all you have?! Nice try!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[George II]

38. Don't you mean "riiiiight"?

[shanny]

17. I was lurking here in 2015-16 and remember there was at least one poster

who thought Bernie was unqualified for the job of president because, despite years of having a good salary, he wasn't rich enough.

Specifically, he clearly couldn't handle his own finances so how could he run the government?

It was....surreal.

[Cha]

25. "lurking"?

[Quixote1818]

162. It has a different meaning for people who browse the net than in regular life

Definition - What does Lurking mean?
Lurking is a slang term for when an individual reads a message board without posting or engaging with the community. Lurking is sometimes encouraged by forum moderators as a way for new members to get a sense of the community and etiquette before participating. Lurking also may occur if a user simply wants to get some information without adding to the discussion.

A person lurking on a message board or other online community is referred to as a lurker.

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/8156/lurking

[Mariana]

199. I suspect that someone who has posted 225,262 times on DU

is well aware of how the word "lurking" is used in the context of a discussion forum.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

34. Yep. Don't 👀 now

^^^^^^

[SidDithers]

100. "lurking"...

Sid

[sheshe2]

115. ;)

TBG!

[SidDithers]

136. Yup...

Sid

[Quixote1818]

164. What is so funny?

Lurking has an entirely different meaning on the net than it had in the past/present in regular life. The posters use is the correct usage for this instance.

https://www.techopedia.com/definition/8156/lurking

[SidDithers]

166. I know what lurking means...

that’s why I was laughing at the posters claim.

Sid

[betsuni]

10. Capitalism is okay now!

[obnoxiousdrunk]

16. Who knew

2.5 mil is a fortune ?

[Cha]

22. Who knew it wasn't?

[AlexSFCA]

23. barely a fortune for an old senator with decades of experience

[George II]

46. Since he arrived in Washington in 1991, he and his wife have earned in the vicinity of $5M.....

....yet in 2016 he had about $500,000.

[sheshe2]

74. Interesting.

Lottery winner perhaps?

[Cha]

102. Oh?

So sudden wealth.. not over the years.

[Cha]

67. Yeah, poor thing

[stonecutter357]

30. wtf A $2.5 Million Fortune ?

[samnsara]

32. that is not a whole lot of money these days...

...maybe one good sized home, cpl beemers, nice vacas and janes clothing budget...But not several homes and a yacht.

[lgrnwd]

54. Bernie does own several homes

[sheshe2]

80. Three.

Two in Vermont and one in DC.

[SMC22307]

223. At least one has a hefty mortgage. (n/t)

[earthside]

212. $2.5 million is not a fortune.

If one has had a good job, managed their 401K well, bought a house, and been frugal -- one can easily be worth a million dollars or more.

No one is casting aspersions on those who have struggled.
But ... for a U.S. Senator of his age, $2.5 million is hardly a fortune.

My wife has been a public librarian for 30 years, I was stay-home dad -- and our worth is now over a million dollars.
We aren't rich and I don't think of ourselves has having a 'fortune'.

[DBoon]

33. as one of my co-workers here in LA said

"I always wanted to be a millionaire. I never thought it would be through a house in Van Nuys"

[madville]

41. $2.5 Million Fortune?

LOL, move over Warren Buffet, Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos.

[TwilightZone]

48. To a lot of people, $2.5m is a fortune.

Most people, probably. It's significantly more money than the vast majority of people will ever accumulate.

Ask single parents who are working three jobs to feed their families if $2.5m is a fortune.

[greatauntoftriplets]

60. Well stated.

[Cha]

70. I know.. it's weird trying to

downplay the amount of $2.5 Million BUCK$.

[sheshe2]

83. Thank you!

[Blue_true]

103. It really to see people that were piloring someone that owned an $800,000 home

Last edited Sat Apr 13, 2019, 08:14 PM - Edit history (1)

bending over backwards to defend someone that owns THREE $500,000 plus homes. The hypocrisy was always there, just interesting to see it in the clear.

[SMC22307]

226. Who owns an $800K home and who, exactly, was piloring [sic] them? (n/t)

[Blue_true]

232. There have been posts here about the disgust of McMansions.

Let me explain, in my part of Florida, $800,000 basically buys a mansion in a nice part of town. Those richer have the ranch mansions with acres of land.

I know a bit about Vermont because I have friend and business associates in the Boston region that go there often. It is highly rural, a $500,000 home there is a significant home. A lakefront home on Lake Chaplain is what wealthy people from New England and Canada buy (the lake extends into Canada).

[SMC22307]

224. That's why Bernie fights for a liveable wage, healthcare as a...

basic human right, free college, etc. I'm decades younger than the guy and get *exhausted* just thinking about the schedule he keeps.

[sheshe2]

87. Tell that to poor people that work more than one job.

Tell that to a family that struggles to feed their children.

Tell that to the woman/ man that lives on the street.

[madville]

88. That's not the context

They are trying to frame Bernie as a hypocrite because he has amassed a relatively modest amount of wealth over a long career. The point is to try to turn people against him, it's entertaining but many will fall for it.

[sheshe2]

90. However it seems that the wealth was not gain over years of service.

Only the last few.

We shall see when he releases his taxes.

[lapucelle]

222. There's some data available on Open Secrets.

https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/net-worth/Bernie-Sanders?cid=N00000528&year=2015

[sheshe2]

43. Kick and Recommend

[sandensea]

45. $2.5 million isn't "a fortune" these days, frankly.

Having a home (with little or no debt) in a minimally high-value area, a vacation home, a professional income (such as a U.S. Senator's), and a few good moves investment-wise, can easily amount to that.

Never mind having a best-selling book to your name.

[TwilightZone]

49. Ask single parents who are working three jobs to feed their families if $2.5m is a fortune.

[dogman]

140. When Bernie was a single parent over 30 years it would have been a fortune too.

He then married a woman with a professional career and advanced his own career and saved and invested.

[George II]

51. There are only 11 million people out of about 330 million in the US that have $1M. Only about....

.....800,000 have $2M.

Let's turn it around, of 330 million people 329.2 million do NOT have $2M and 319 million do NOT have $1M.

But it's not a question of having $1M or $2M, it's a question of someone who has been criticizing "millionaires" for years becoming a member of that club during the time he was criticizing those members.

As Groucho Marx said, “I don’t want to belong to any club that would accept me as one of its members.”

[rgbecker]

69. I don't know where you got your numbers, but maybe you have a link.

Most data that I've found show wealth by households rather than individuals and in recent years the $2 million in net worth number puts you just over the 95% level.....so out of 125,000,000 households that would be 125,000,000 times .05 (5%) or 6,250,000 households in the US with over $2 million in net worth.

Not Individuals, but households. With an average of 2.5 in each Household, that means 15,625,000 could be living in households with 2 million or more in net worth. That's more than the population of Illinois, the nation's 5th most populous state.

https://dqydj.com/net-worth-brackets-wealth-brackets-one-percent/

At least that's my reading of the situation.

[Blue_true]

105. I am LOLing my ass off seeing Bernie supporters defending the rich.

Can't make stuff like this up.

[Cha]

107. SWITCH!

[Blue_true]

109. I guess things are always conditional with some people.

Just watch, if it comes out that Joe Biden is worth $3 million, those same people are going to be accusing him of getting his money by doing favors for the rich, like Hillary was treated (Goldman Sachs speeches, ect).

[betsuni]

111. So much for the lauded consistency and authenticity.

It used to be "Eat the rich!" Now: "So what if Bernie's rich?" followed by a #Whatabout.

[sheshe2]

119. I am suffering from whip lash!

[lunamagica]

112. This is surreal

[Blue_true]

187. Sure is. Up is Down and Down is Up and Blue is Pink level surreal. nt

[lapucelle]

142. Three houses and $2,500,000 isn't *really* rich.

SMH

[Blue_true]

188. I guess there is rich and there is Bernie rich.

To some, they are not the same rich. It's all too rich for me, I think I'm getting tummy upset.

[George II]

155. That dqydj site has numbers that are much higher than others I've seen. Here's one as of Mar 2018...

....that has the 11 million number. Can't find that 800,000 source again. However, I think that one might be a little low.

https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/life/features/2018/03/24/heres-how-many-millionaires-there-are-in-the-us/33205747/

That 2.5 people per household is overall in the US, for young and old Americans. Keep in mind that people who have $1 or $2 million are likely to be older and have smaller "households" (i.e., no children at home any longer, perhaps single)

Now, also keep in mind that Bernard and Jane Sanders have had a "household" income of $200,000 - $300,000 or more for about 25 years. That's somewhere between five and six million dollars. I suspect he's been under reporting his actual net worth.

[Blue_true]

189. I thought about the possibility that he has been under reporting last night.

Bernie alone has averaged ~$140,000 in salary for the last 28 years. For him alone that would be around $4 million in income. Take into account that all of his work related expenses are reimbursed (that does not happen for a self owned business person), so a lot of the $4 million never left his pocket. Now throw in Jane's salary. They were likely millionaires at least five years ago.

[George II]

195. According to his 2015 Senate Personal Financial Disclosure, they have mutual funds....

....valued at between $191,000 and $815,000 (the form allows for large ranges), along with his homes in Washington DC and Burlington Vermont. As you point out, he's made about $4 million since being in Washington, and for eight years Jane made $149,000 a year at Burlington College, plus her $200,000 severance pay. That's more than $1.3 million since 2004.

No doubt he was a "millionaire" long before he wrote those books.

Normally this is no big deal, but in his case he's been bashing the "millionaire class" for years, never letting on that he's been one himself.

[Blue_true]

198. Yep. nt

[rgbecker]

197. Pretty good: Making up their own definition of "Millionaire"!!!

They are just counting "investable assets". So no cars, furnishings, emergency cash accounts or insurance or primary house. I'd say the number of households with net worth over 1 million dollars then must be higher if we are going to talk about actual net worth, as in "Sanders' net worth make him millionaire, not a socialist". This household number would be indicated in the US census' numbers which it is.

Your point about the 2.5 average household size is well taken but it muddies the water if articles like this one are going to interchange the use of the word to describe individual millionaires and millionaire households as it does in the first two sentences. (Right out of the blocks, as the used to say).

Your last sentence is another unclear leap as I don't think Sanders is reporting anything...the numbers are from a Forbes' guess. Maybe they got it wrong. That kind of phrasing sounds a bit like your bashing Sanders when his word is not at issue because it isn't even his word. Suspicion of under reporting....call Mueller! WTF? Please save the attacks for Trump rather than for a Democratic presidential contender.

[sandensea]

71. It's a nice chunk of change, don't get me wrong.

But for a successful, 77 year-old professional, with a best-selling book in his recent past, it's nothing to be surprised at - certainly nothing to be scandalized at.

[sheshe2]

89. Okay.

But for a successful, 77 year-old professional, with a best-selling book in his recent past, it's nothing to be surprised at - certainly nothing to be scandalized at.

A best selling book. Great!

He is also been a Congressman and a Senator for years, do you have a list of his accomplishments in that capacity as it is the job he is being paid for by the taxpayers. TIA.

[lapucelle]

148. See that, George. There's really only 311,575,000,000 folks who DON'T have millionaire status

given the households they live in. "Millionaire" isn't really an elite club at all.

You could fit all the millionaires in Illinois and the rest of us in the other 49 states.

[UniteFightBack]

172. I agree. nt

[sandensea]

175. Thank you. It's just a simple fact this day and age.

Besides: I don't care how wealthy, or not, one's president is.

As long as his/her net worth was ethically earned, they are competent and professional - and above all as long as their policies are humanist and advocate for the greater good - their personal finances shouldn't matter.

There are many rich progressives and poor fascists - and vice versa.

[UniteFightBack]

176. Unless something nefarious is in there....his taxes are now a non issue since he has released them.

MOVING ON.

[sandensea]

182. Which is precisely why our friend Cheeto is so anxious to hide his returns

He knows that you'd need a Russian translator so sift through them - and a chair to fall back on from the shock we'd have after seeing how dirty his finances are.

[Me.]

50. Pretty Good For A Guy Who Didn't Start Earning Decent Paychecks Until Almost 40

and now has acquired a taste for flying private

[sheshe2]

121. Isn't that when he first voted as well?

[Me.]

157. JUst About The Same Time

that he started running for mayor.

[Devil Child]

55. I'm doubtful that any of Sen. Sander's wealth was had through exploitation of the proletariat

Therefore I'm gonna file this one under IDGAF.

[dawg day]

56. I'm not surprised--

Senators earn a good salary, and his home state isn't expensive to live in or get to from DC. His wife had a well-paying job for years. They're in the 70s. They've probably owned real estate.

This isn't a huge amount for someone his age. It's a good amount, no doubt, but there's a big difference between $2.5 million and real wealth these days....

I don't like Sanders much at all, but I don't begrudge him a nice nest-egg in his silver years. He didn't have to steal to amass that-- just get paid well, own a house, and live frugally.

[vsrazdem]

59. So what. Nancy Pelosi owns 10 properties worth 23 million. What's the point. Are you saying

that people that have money should not serve in the government. This is pretty silly.

[Blue_true]

106. Nancy Pelosi has not made a career out of bashing rich people.

Bernie has.

[vsrazdem]

123. Oh, so now pointing out the facts about the 1% is now bashing rich people, give me a break.

[Blue_true]

186. Yet, now that Bernie is firmly in the 1%.

Last edited Sat Apr 13, 2019, 04:33 PM - Edit history (1)

His suggestion to anyone that isn't is to write a best selling book, like such a thing just magically happens for a regular Joe and Betsy Doe.

The main issue that I have with Bernie is his hypocrisy.

BTW, Monday happens in less than 7 and a half hours. Has Bernie released the tax returns that he said would be released BEFORE Monday, or did he find more i's to dot and t's to cross?

[vsrazdem]

194. Yes, there seems to be a lot of hypocrisy going around.

[SMC22307]

228. And if by some miracle it ends up being Bernie v. Drumpf...

you'll vote for Bernie, being the good Democrat that you are, right? I ask that question of everyone in this thread bashing him over real estate.

[Blue_true]

230. If it is Bernie versus Trump.

Not only would I vote for Bernie, but I will contribute to his campaign and canvass for him. I am not remotely close to being stupid, ANYONE in our primary is one million times better than Trump, period.

[SMC22307]

231. Good to hear.

Let's hear the from all the Bernie-bashers out there. The stakes are too high to keep tearing down candidates...

[Hassin Bin Sober]

163. She sure doesn't.

[KayF]

64. all totaled, his fortune adds up to less than half of Chelsea Clinton's apartment

and he's nearly 80 years old and has been a member of Congress for decades.

[rgbecker]

73. Ouch!

LOL!

[lapucelle]

153. What does Chelsea Clinton have to do with BS status as a millionaire?

She's not a socialist who has made a career (and marketed a best-seller to the 99%) by railing against the millionaire class.

[betsuni]

91. Chelsea worked on Wall St., never said she wasn't a capitalist.

If she ever ran for office, like Bernie, by saying she isn't a capitalist and repeatedly called Democrats out-of-touch wealthy establishment elites beholden to Wall St., corporations, and wealthy donors who pay them so much they ignore the working and middle classes, insinuating they are all corrupted by money, she would be a hypocrite too.

[Blue_true]

108. Bingo. nt

[BannonsLiver]

144. Remind me again what Chelsea is running for?

I must have missed her announcement.

[lapucelle]

154. "But, but, but... what about Chelsea Clinton?"

She's not the one who catapulted herself into the millionaire's club by marketing, selling, and distributing a book (through Amazon!) to working folks about the evils of a system that benefits the wealthy at the expense of the rest of us.

[lapucelle]

151. What does Chelsea Clinton have to do with BS's millions?

If someone is close to 80, has been in Congress for decades with no major legislative accomplishments, but has managed to amass a fortune, then maybe it's time to retire.

[eilen]

65. Book sales...

I don't begrudge Bernie making money. However, think about it. He wrote this book and sold it riding off his notoriety/popularity from running for the Democratic candidacy for the Presidential election. If he had tried to write this in 2012, no one would have bought it. Since then, really, how great has he been for the Democratic Party? He pretty much spit in the Vermont local party's face.

He pushed a purity bar to clear that is absolutely inadequate to run a national Presidential election and that is bad for Democrats. I don't care about what he has, I care about what he does.

[Cha]

66. BS stopped railing against "Millionaries"

when he became one.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

165. Nope. Not true.

One of those “facts” that gets made up because it sounds “good”. Then spread around by people

https://amp.axios.com/bernie-sanders-estate-tax-billionaires-c48ccaec-72a0-418e-8f0e-5a77a1d3c175.html
The fairest way to reduce wealth inequality, invest in the disappearing middle class and preserve our democracy is to enact a progressive estate tax on the inherited wealth of multi-millionaires and billionaires."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

214. Making up facts about Bernie is all that's left... the fear and desperation is palpable!!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2020!!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[betsuni]

215. "millionaire" and "multimillionaire" are different words.

[NastyRiffraff]

72. I honestly don't care

if Bernie or anyone else amassed $2.5 Mil, $5 Mil, or more. What bothers me is that he's spent years calling anyone ELSE who has made money corrupt, in the thrall of Wall Street, an oligarch, etc, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Only Bernie is pure enough to handle large amounts of money, apparently.

It's not the money, it's the hypocrisy.

[Cha]

84. Exacty, Riff.. well put!

BS isn't calling out "Millionaires" Anymore

BS rails against Amazon while selling his books on Amazon. No hypocrisy there.

[watoos]

75. Another Republican thread.

Am I allowed to call it dumb?
Hope I’m wrong but bashing Bernie is going to suppress the millennial vote in the general.
If you don’t like him don’t vote for him.

[Cha]

85. All you have are Insults.. calling this thread "republican"..

you have no idea what you're talking about.. so you resort to name calling.

[shenmue]

117. I've voted Democratic all my adult life.

[Devil Child]

125. Nailed it watoos

Forbes is chumming the water.

[namahage]

149. Stop trying to get us to fight amongst ourselves.

Don't you want to win in 2020?

[SMC22307]

229. Did you wag your finger at the OP as well,

for giving us a Forbes article which incorrectly labels Bernie as a "Socialist"?

[TrollBuster9090]

78. I'm Not A Bernie Supporter, But Chase Peterson-Wethorn Has My Permission To...

to go fck himself with a whole truckload of Forbes magazines.

It's not 'rich' or hypocritical of Sanders to claim that plutocratic billionaires have too much influence in the American democracy, and should be taxed at a higher rate. In fact, the fact that he's a (barely) millionaire himself gives him street cred for his views.

He's not a trust fund brat, nor is he a robber baron. He's been a politician, with a professional class salary since he was in his 30s, and his wife is also a professional. Politicians generally vote themselves a salary in the lower six figure range, and educators' salaries run somewhere between five and six figures.

That articles says the Sanders family is worth 2.5 million, and that 1.7 million of it was from his last three BOOKS. That means that he and his wife, after FORTY YEARS of earning professional class salaries, were only worth a net $800,000. Realistically, that's EXTREMELY low.

I'd say Sanders is probably in the bottom 20% wealth category of the United States Senators.

And even if he weren't, what's the point of Peterson-Withorn's argument? The fact that he's a millionaire only increases the notion that he's arguing on principle, rather than on shallow self interests.

Personally, I give Democratic voters FAR more credit for their intelligence than the right wing noise machine is. If they think that Democratic voters will turn against Bernie's criticism of millionaires because he IS a millionaire, they're in for a rude awakening.

[Cha]

86. I notice BS is not calling out "Millionaires" anymore.

[betsuni]

95. I wonder if "wealthy elites" is next to go.

[Cha]

96. It damn well better be. BS broad

brushed our whole Democratic Party "elite" after the 2016 rigging in of trump. Blaming it on the Dems.

Taking absolutely no responsibility.

[BlueFlorida]

92. I am surprised Forbes didn't look into

Old Towne Media, LLC. Or is that money kept in a different account?

[matt819]

94. Sorry folks

But $2.5 million isn’t a fortune these days. Sure, I’d love that in cash or even in net worth, but a fortune it isn’t.

[brush]

227. 2.5M is certainly a fortune. Especially in a country where a vast majority can't handle a $400...

expense. 2.5M is a lot of money to most people. What are you, a billionaire or something?

[Blue_true]

97. I really don't care that he is rich. I do care about him attempting to cover

that up while he lambasted rich people.

[ucrdem]

113. Gotta wonder who's buying all those books.

At least I do.

[dogman]

141. Yeah, hard to imagine a guy with a million donations could sell a few books.

Keep wondering, it will occupy your mind.

[ucrdem]

146. Yes, I wonder about that too.

I wonder about a lot of things.

[rgbecker]

130. Thank goodness we are holding Biden in reserve in case this net worth issue becomes a thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden

[Honeycombe8]

131. I've long thought that so many people run for President, so they can make money.

It makes their names nationally known, if they're lucky. A national name translates into money: books and speeches automatically turn into coin. It helps careers, which translates into money, as well.

There are people who run who have little to zero chance of being the nominee. It's expensive, tiring, and harmful to one's current career (you can't do anything else besides run). So why do it? Two reasons: You have a shot at being chosen for the VP slot, and/or it's a ticket to fame and money.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that. If they are in a position and have the opportunity to better their lives, it's a good thing to take it. It's good to be rich. Who doesn't want to be?

One thing is curious, though. The article he says he owns three homes, and gives the date he bought each. Sanders has previously said he inherited the house he got after the 2016 run for President, but the article says he bought it for $575,000.

And as the article points out, it's possible Sanders is worth much more than $2.5M, if he has a 401k or other IRA account. That's not required to be reported, and it's not in income tax returns. Most people who make a good salary contribute to those, if they have them available. Could be worth millions, if invested in the stock market and growing for decades. Again, there's nothing wrong with that. It's good financial planning. It'd be concerning if after all these years of working and writing books, he weren't rich.

[BannonsLiver]

133. The real number is probably double that.

[dogman]

143. I would have thought that.

With his age and combined income with his wife. I know people who have worked in the building trades when times were good that have accumulated that much or more and retired 17 years younger than he is.