Is former president Obama a hypocrite when it comes to wealth? He and his wife Michelle have earned their many millions fairly using the capitalistic system. I do wonder why does he no longer speak the same way about the wealthy? There was a time when former president Obama had some strong words for those he considered rich.
Barack Obama says the rich owe the world a huge debt
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/07/ … huge-debt/
Former United States President Barack Obama believes that ballooning wealth inequality is a threat to society, and that those who have the means should help those who are less fortunate.
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/18/barack- … n-eat.html
THEN HE BECAME WEALTHY
According to the New York Post, Barack and Michelle Obama are "on their way to becoming a billionaire brand."
https://www.investors.com/politics/edit … subsidies/
NOW, he does not worry about purchasing a $15 million home. Is this hypocritical considering the previous advice he had for the wealthy when he was in office? Is he being a hypocrite? I am glad former president Obama has become wealthy. I just think he has “talked the talk,” but isn't “walking the walk.”
I believe below sums the situation up perfectly.
“Too many in Democratic leadership peddle the politics of envy and victimhood to grab power, wealth and success for themselves. They indulge their followers in the lie that someone getting wealthy comes at someone else’s expense. While this is offensive, it is made worse by the fact that they do it specifically for their own gain, making the political class more powerful and the government more bloated all while damaging the concept of the American Dream.
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/carol-r … lion-house
That 15 million dollar home is acres and acres of beachfront property!
I suppose the Obama’s don’t really believe in AGW or else they feel happy to invest in property that according to the Democrat party leadership will be under water in 10-12 years! Has Obama become a climate change denier or does he really believe what he said when he ran for office, that his time as president would mark the beginning of the ocean levels receding? Remember that speech?
This is hilarious hypocrisy at it's best, of course he doesn't believe it! To be fair, he should be prosecuted as a climate change denier, or maybe he could claim that he forgot like "crooked Hillary" forgot about her 30 thousand unsecured E-mails
"prosecuted as a climate change denier"
I don't think not believing in a scientific theory is a criminal act.
When I voted Obama. I caught slack.when I vote Trump I catch greif. We are tired
Not yet anyway, but their are some that see it as a criminal act. In 2016 Obama's Attorney General Loretta Lynch discussed taking civil action against so called climate change deniers to the senate judiciary committee and referred the motion to the FBI.
According to the Daily signal in 2016 or before, "California Attorney General Kamala Harris and New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, both of whom have opened up investigations of ExxonMobil for allegedly lying to the public and their shareholders about climate change."
https://www.dailysignal.com/2016/03/10/ … e-deniers/
Yes, and Oprah has an army of servants waiting on her hand and foot. Her wealth does not change who she advocates for, now does it?
What conservatives so often ignore if that if I took your view I would condemn the Roosevelts, Kennedy's etc. It is not having the wealth but the idea that while in positions of leadership your focus should be on the best economic interest of common citizen person, of average means not the plutocrat class. I did not see Obama working contrary to any of those principles while he was in office.
The point is Obama had many harsh criticisms of the wealthy, until he became wealthy. Where is the criticism now? I suppose Obama looks at the wealthy quite differently since he became one of them. He is now is a position to be an example of wealth equality. So, why isn't he doing it?
Those criticisms of the wealthy are warranted, how they take advantage and skew things to their advantage. It is funny though, Mr. Obama has a doctorate degree in Law and his wife has a Master's degree. He certainly is a position to do well in his own right, could the cause of all this brouhaha be resentment (hint)?
Has any President in modern times left office as a pauper? Can I guess why Obama is held to a different standard? Were we all expecting Obama to return to the ghetto? He expressed nothing different than most Democrat politicians having problems with wealth and the wealthy "running off with the store" relative to the rest of us. There is no basis for your assumption that because he is successful he becomes a greedy and selfish A$$, like one that comes to mind...
Where is his belief of income equality? Where is his belief now about the redistribution of wealth? He's not talking about it now....for some reason.
From 2013..."President Barack Obama on Wednesday night called for more redistribution of wealth to America's working poor, as part of an unapologetic plan to use government activism to revive the US economy in his second term."
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldn … -poor.html
It is obvious money has changed the one-time self acclaimed champion of the working poor. Just like Clinton and the others.
President Donald Trump has been a very wealthy person his entire life. He can now welcome former president Obama into the league of the greedy and selfish.
Why do you think wealth has changed him? This is who he is, was who he was when he wasn’t wealthy - All of his bloviating against the rich was a facade. Just like every liberal position is a ruse to get votes or to achieve some objective other than what they pretend to be saying or doing.just like AGW, Obama never believed in AGW or he wouldn’t be spending a fortune for beachfront property. Anyone who believes otherwise has been duped.
I know you know this Mike. So this thread is rhetorical, the truth is he never was who he wanted you to believe he was. He didn’t change, wealth was always his end game!
From 2013..."President Barack Obama on Wednesday night called for more redistribution of wealth to America's working poor, as part of an unapologetic plan to use government activism to revive the US economy in his second term."
As you conservatives remind me, that is SOP for Democrats. He was in office in 2013 and was supporting idea of making the wealthy pay their fair share and not hide within loopholes.
Agreed. The U.S. now has the highest level of income inequality since right before the Great Depression. It also is the highest in the entire world.
"More redistribution of wealth" is not the same as giving everyone the same amount of money.
And billionaires with lower tax rates than average Americans is hardly their fair share.
So, why doesn't former president Obma redistribute HIS wealth? Real leaders lead by example.
LOL. Does anyone in government with ideas for free stuff ever offer to pay for it?
Does anyone advocating social justice ever walk the walk in their personal life?
That's the problem on the left. It's like religion. You feel really good telling others what's wrong, what they should do, how they are failing. And, since they know best, they get to do everything they complain about. Because, they should have extra privilege in order to push others into doing what they think is right.
You see it with money. It's always everyone else's money that needs to be shared. You see it with racism. They aren't racist (even though their words and actions are) because they say they want equality. You see it with sexism. It's ok for them to be sexist, if they spout liberal ideology.
It's a religion.
I'm not sure what that has to do with my point, but anyway:
Do you know for a fact that he does or does not give some of his newfound money to charity?
EDIT: I wonder if he donates to his own charitable foundation....
The basis of this thread and the supporting links are all bogus. People choose to pick on Obama, do they hold the Clinton's to the same standard? The Right wingers always whine about the concept of massive wealth redistribution but the remedy and the objective, is in reality, far less draconian.
To your point, some of the comments on this thread are bogus, inflammatory and typical of far right extremism.
There are good people on both the right and left who donate massive amounts of money to charity.
There are selfish people on the right and left who would rather keep every dime to themselves (like Trump).
"There are selfish people on the right and left who would rather keep every dime to themselves (like Trump)."
"In addition, there is no evidence how much if anything that Trump donates, again because he doesn't release his tax returns."
Aren't these two statements (both from you) rather contradictory? Or are you just assuming, based on a dislike of the man because there is no evidence either way, that he does not give to charity?
We do know he donates at least his presidential paycheck...outside of that...it is unknown...
Good point. Guess he doesn't really want to keep every dime to himself, as was stated.
According to various fact check sites, nobody seems to know what or how much he donates. He simply claims he does.
I simply read.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … edirect=on
Ah. And reading that he is dissolving his charity and will "give away its remaining money" (first sentence of the link you read) means he doesn't make any contributions? It doesn't read that way to me...
He gave money to his own "charity" and then used that money for himself.
It's now under investigation for corruption and violation of various charity laws.
I read his intention just fine.
"He gave money to his own "charity" and then used that money for himself."
"It's now under investigation for corruption and violation of various charity laws."
Again, these two statements most definitely contradict each other. That someone claims he is a crook does not mean that he gave money to the charity and then used it for himself. Just like all the other hundreds of claims, when you have a court verdict, by a jury of his peers stating guilt, then come back and make the claim. Until then it is nothing but another statement without foundation, just as the statement that he gives nothing to charity was.
Those long lists of "lies" I see posted that Trump has made has nothing on what posters on these forums are saying. No difference between Trumps statements and yours: neither has any basis in reality. You even said so yourself when you commented that you cannot know what he gives (but that he gives nothing) and again when you (and your link) says he is being investigated (and charged) but not convicted...coupled with a statement he is already guilty.
That's quite a mangling of my comments.
Again, we don't know how much of his salary if any that he is giving away. We do know he set up and then dissolved a phony charity that is now under investigation.
These are facts and not contradictory except to Trump apologists.
ALL of you are entirely missing the point of the thread.
President Donald Trump has always been a wealthy man. He has NEVER talked up the socialist concept of wealth redistribution. Obama tried to make the wealthy the enemy. Claiming they didn't pay their fair share, but not saying what that would be.
NOW Obama is a wealthy man. He no longer gives speeches about redistribution of wealth or how evil wealthy people are, because he is NOW one of them.
It's called hypocrisy.
So, I wonder what Obama NOW feels about the "fair share" wealthy people should give? Where are his speeches on wealth distribution?
It involves more than simply donating to charities. Distribution of wealth is a socialist concept and was done in Venezuela, where it didn't work out too well for them.
It was obviously easy for Obama to make wealthy people the enemy, until he became one of them.
This IS also the case with the Clintons.
"President Donald Trump has always been a wealthy man. He has NEVER talked up the socialist concept of wealth redistribution. Obama tried to make the wealthy the enemy. Claiming they didn't pay their fair share, but not saying what that would be"
Conservatives have a different view of this issue over progressives and to try to put some sort of spin on it using the fame and fortunes of Barack Obama is disengenuous.
The issues regarding wealth is taxes, unwarranted influence on politicians in Washington, and being against all the things the fat cats are "less regulation" for example.
Obama proposals were relatively mild during his term with GOP intransigence all the way. Better be glad it was just him and not me in his place. Where is the "big talk" about wealth distribution or is this just another method is bashing Democrats and progressives?
The point of this thread is to distribute inflammatory, divisive and insulting claims about anyone who doesn't support Trump.
It is the only point.
I view it as a way of revealing the truth and hypocrisy of Democrats and progressives. Democrats will redistribute wealth as a way to gain power and votes from the poor. Oldest play in the book. Didn't work out too well for Venezuela.
I'm sure he still believes the rich should be taxed at a higher rate. But, as is the historical case, most presidents sit back and try not to criticize the president who follows them.
What you are fabricating is belief of some new position based on the fact that he chose to spend some of his wealth. Again, one of the countless times you fail to understand a Democrat and just make up falsehoods.
And there is a huge difference between Obama making money from book deals about his time in office and Trump, who makes money from the government spending money at his properties.
Your racist thoughts are peeking out here. You see a black man, everyone else sees an ex president.
No, I said they were picking on Obama in a way they do not pick on the Kennedy's, Clinton's. These people support and vote for Democrats regardless of the fact that they are/were wealthy because they know that their wealth is that much more secure when there is less exploitation of those who are not. It a dumb idea to assume that you have to be poor in order to put your money where your mouth is regarding growing income inequity in this society.
I also see an ex-president no different from others who have held the office and as a Democrat he is going to root for the middle and working class, whether he becomes relatively wealthy or otherwise.
So why are these rich hypocritical Democrats continuing to vote the progressive line even though they certainly know that will affect their pocket book? Perhaps, they believe in the principle inspite of how it may affect them....
"Her wealth does not change who she advocates for, now does it?"
Of course not. It does however, point out the immense hypocrisy of "advocating" for the poor, at the expense of others, while refusing to take any effective action herself. She has the means to help far more than she does...but refuses to do so, advocating instead that the resources be taken from someone other than herself. Just as the Obama's do.
Do you think that the Clinton's, Obamas or Oprah are going to vote GOP?
Why would they vote for a Democrat or its philosophy when they are at risk of having to pay more?
How do you figure dem apples?
Not sure what their voting preferences have to do with anything, but perhaps they will simply cut back on their voluntary charity giving if their taxes go up.
In any case it surely has zero to do with the fact that the rich, even those celebrated for "helping" the poor, give only a small fraction of what they could give while maintaining a VERY nice lifestyle.
You could fill a book with examples of rich Democrat politicians ranting about something or other, while not living by the standards they want forced on the rest of us.
So, sure. On the subject of the OP Obama's statements are hypocritical.
His (their) goal all along was to become quite wealthy, as well as powerful (or at least to feel powerful), and he used politics to do it. He (they) have always been hypocritical about it but those who voted for him did not want to believe it.
Deception was the only way to meet the goal and they knew it. The very people they posited themselves to help only became more indebted to the slavish assistance system they are entrenched in.
Denying the truth about themselves and their goals he (they) purposefully worked to divide the country while quietly working to amass for themselves. Spouting restraint for others, they live extravagantly, spouting peace they work with those who desire destruction.
It seems endless, but an old proverb has been proven many times over: the stone rolled rolls back. It is frustrating to see people like this seemingly succeed, but in truth, they will never have what they seek for their thirst is insatiable.
A more accurate title would be...Former President Obama hypocritical about wealth!
Although to be fair...This is true of pretty much all politicians...
I would say President Donald Trump would be an exception. He came to office as a very wealthy man. He donates his salary. I think this makes him a bit different. President Donald Trump doesn't need the money.
None of the modern presidents "need" the money they have/had. Can't speak for those of a hundred years ago, though - perhaps some of them were virtual paupers.
He is Pesident of the United States, which makes him a politician.
Well...Everyone says he doesn't act like one...so...
I am going to stick with he isn't a politician...
I respect your right to believe that way. I simply follow the standard definition of a politician:
: a person experienced in the art or science of government
especially : one actively engaged in conducting the business of a government
As POTUS, he is "actively engaged" in government.
So you think he is experienced in the art and science of government?
Or that he is actively engaged?
Both seem to say that you are in support of his job performance..?
He is actively engaged and experienced in the art and science of government...
How can the President of the United States NOT be actively engaged in government?
Have you ever been in the military? If so...you know full well how someone can be in a position and not be actively engaged...
But...to get back to my original post...Trump wasn't a politician prior to becoming the POTUS...as many others have been...But, I am thinking that you knew what I meant by my original post...
I think we're down to small differences in meaning. I'll just say that he was highly political before he became POTUS including previous runs at the Presidency.
I agree he wasn't a politician in the traditional sense before he became POTUS. We may have to simply disagree about whether as President he is a politician now.
LOL He still isn't a "politician in the traditional sense". Just listen for 10 seconds after he opens his mouth and THAT becomes apparent! Or 5 seconds, for that matter.
Trump came to office with inherited money from daddy. We have no idea if he is a wealthy man because he lies about his wealth and hides his tax returns.
He obviously needs money because he is begging other nations to come to Mar-a-Largo to keep it from going bankrupt.
In addition, there is no evidence how much if anything that Trump donates, again because he doesn't release his tax returns.
How about a 2019 article from Forbes Magazine outlining the wealth of President Donald Trump? It estimates his wealth as of February of this year as $3.1 Billion.
When people talk about his tax returns is makes me laugh. He is "high-end" tax earner. He doesn't provide a W-2 at the end of the year. You would have to be able to comprehend the complex taxes paid by his corporations. I doubt many people who are not a CPA would understand it. So, the "tax return" claim just makes me laugh.
I don't care how much he donates, he provide thousands of jobs and that is much more important. He's not like Obama, he believes in wealth and has never changed his views on it.
How does Forbes know what he is worth other than guessing and believing what Trump says?
"I don't care how much he donates." But you do care about what Obama donates.
Talk about a double standard.
Ah, I suppose you don't know much about Forbes Magazine. So, I will enlighten you. They have a staff paid to review the public filings of public companies. You see, public companies and those that are traded on a stock exchange MUST make their profits and losses as well as tax filings part of public record. There is a wealth of information in the public record to determine the wealth of any large business or businessman.
See, you learned something today.
I never said I care about what Obama donates.
I do admire your ability to state things in threads that aren't there. You are very skilled at doing this.
Nice try. I read Forbes all of the time.
You can enlighten me even more. Please provide the ticker symbols of Trump's "public companies".
"I never said I cared about what Obama donates."
Isn't the title of this thread: Could former president Obama be hypocritical about wealth?
That sounds like you care quite a bit about what he donates.
Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts raised $140 million in its initial public offering in 1995. It was listed on the New York Stock Exchange under Trump's initials, DJT.
Anything more, you will have to do your own research. I could teach you, but it would take up too much of my time.
"That sounds like you care quite a bit about what he donates."
NOW, I'm questioning your ability to comprehend English.
You see being hypocritical about wealth really has nothing to do with what someone donates.
LOL. That single company from 1995 went bankrupt.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6556470/ns/bu … Wa6V-hKgdU
Please, do keep teaching me.
The company is still active and if you look at the Forbes article I provided. you can see it is now doing well. It is under the “Trump Hotel Management & Licensing Business” and “Trump Product Licensing.”
The article you provided is from 2004.
You see there are two types of bankruptcy a business can file.
Chapter 11 is a reorganization of a business structure.
From your article.
“Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. and numerous related operations filed for protection from its creditors under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code on Sunday in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Camden, N.J.”
“In a telephone interview Monday, Trump said he will remain chairman and CEO of Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, but his share would be reduced to 27 percent from 47 percent under a proposed restructuring plan reached with bondholders last month.”
So today you've learned about Chapter 11 business bankruptcy and that a company can emerge from bankruptcy and become a success as well as how Forbes Magazine obtains information for its wealth ratings.
You are getting too much free information from me.
Nice deflection. So there are no public companies owned by Trump as you claimed.
That means there is no public proof of his wealth.
Which also means that Forbes has to guess at it based on Trump's word.
I'm glad I can help you understand a little more about credible financial analysis.
I suppose you would need me to define for you how ALL corporations have reporting requirements. I would also explain how these requirements are part of public record.
I could then explain how Forbes keeps track of these public filings for their publication as they have for decades.
I could also give you detailed public information about The Trump Organization LLC.
But, it appears you don't know how corporations work, their reporting requirements and the public information you can obtain about them.
I'll also add you obviously don't grasp the concept of Chapter 11 bankruptcy.
I can't do this, you've gotten enough information from me on this topic. A discussion on this with you is pointless.
You just don't know enough about the business world to make it the slightest bit interesting.
If you think Forbes Magazine bases their wealth ratings on a "guess" I don't know what to say to you.
You are absolutely right. Me, Forbes Magazine, Investopedia, Bloomberg, Money.com, Business Insider even Reuters and the NYT all only "Allege" his wealth.
I'm sure these publications and their reporters are nothing when compared to your business knowledge. What are they thinking?
The only thing I will admit to is learning how people without the slightest concept of how business works, still don't realize how much they don't know. These are people who continue to believe, with their extremely limited ability to understand, that they are on to something. It would be laughable if it wasn't so terribly sad.
Then there are people who have owned a profitable LLC for 12 years. They know you can't get "detailed public information" about it, which someone claimed above.
These same people have decades of experience leading multi-million dollar operating units at large corporations.
And so these same people know more about business than Trump apologists who think Trump owns public companies.
Like usual, those apologists hide their financial ignorance by mocking anyone who points out their mistakes.
What a shame individuals with TDS can't gasp the concept of a holding company. They also may not realize a president has to make a financial disclosure statement every year they are in office. They may not realize THESE financial disclosure statement are part of the public record. Those with TDS don't seem to know how to perform even basic research into a topic concerning President Donald Trump. What a shame!
I haven't read through this whole thread, but generally speaking, I find this argument to be silly. One can be wealthy and still support progressive taxation. True hypocrisy would be supporting progressive taxation then cheating on your taxes to avoid paying any.
The same article I referenced, says that they want to target not only corporations but individuals who hold different opinions about the unproven theory of climate change.
I agree with u, they seem to have an unhealthy need to control others!
by Patty Florence 5 years ago
President Obama was an excellent president because he stood for old-fashioned values, the ones that I learned in school when I was growing up. The way the world sees things these days, old-fashioned values aren't as cherished as they once were. Or, maybe they are! A good example is when he...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 10 years ago
in light of the current sociopolitical and socioeconomic situation regarding the United States of America? Do you believe that President Obama is doing the best job he can under the circumstances? Do you maintain that President Obama can do a much better job as President? Do you contend that...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 9 years ago
What do YOU contend the TEN main goals that President Barack Obama has for America?
by Readmikenow 3 years ago
“WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Barack Obama and Donald Trump are tied this year as the most admired man. It is Obama's 12th time in the top spot versus the first for Trump. Michelle Obama is the most admired woman for the second year in a row.Each year since 1948, Gallup has asked Americans to name, in an...
by ahorseback 8 years ago
I believe that the most important lessons of life were taught to me from being primarily raised in poverty .. I do NOT nor will I ever believe that any good will come of redistribution of wealth in America ., There are a thousand lessons , especially those...
by David Stillwell 8 years ago
Who is responsible for current economic conditions of the United States. Congress or the president?I am interested in your opinions, rants, and factual comments. Have at it people... I value all opinions even if I do not agree with them.
Copyright © 2023 The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of The Arena Platform, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. The Arena Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|