-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pres Obama now doing $400k speeches for Wall Street
- Thread starter Meus Renaissance
- Start date
- Status
Frost Walrus
Member
This may very well damage Mr. Obama's chance at becoming the Democratic Party's Presidential Candidate in 2020. Very interesting.
Because Apple, Google and other tech companies, with their massive tax avoidance, exploitation of labor in 3rd world countries and general scumbaggery are so much better that evil Wall St.
Well I don't think anybody wanted her as a primary or GE candidate in the long run tbh. The question is then, why did the party support her for so long?
They make my phone and technology I use!!!
CrimzonSamurai
Member
Yeah dude, I mean, I just got my salary increased from $13/hr to $14/hr, but I was surviving on that $13/hr so I should really just tell my bosses to keep the extra buck because I don't actually need it right?
I mean it's not like I could use the extra money to buy things that I want instead of need, like a Nintendo Switch or something.
Maybe if I got an even bigger increase I could afford that sailboat I want someday because I love sailing and it would bring me immense joy. Oh, wait, no, that's just pure greed I guess.
Where do you people come from
AbortedWalrusFetus
Member
Also despicable! Of course republican partisans will completely ignore that one because Hillary was in wall streets pocket.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
It's actually really amazing how out of touch with reality people are for thinking this is somehow a betrayal of values or "disappointing"
"Oh sorry, I can't take this nearly half a million paycheck for talking to a bunch of people because making money is evil now, I'm sure my wife is going to totally understand"
I feel like I'm losing my mind reading this shit on a more frequent basis.
"Oh sorry, I can't take this nearly half a million paycheck for talking to a bunch of people because making money is evil now, I'm sure my wife is going to totally understand"
I feel like I'm losing my mind reading this shit on a more frequent basis.
VendettaRed07
Member
Ok it's not a donation. But call me paranoid I guess if an influential politician in our party gets handed giants sacks of money for speeches by financial corporations who regularly donate money to politicians and stack congress with lackies who have favorable positions towards their industry
I just believe it's wrong for someone involved heavily in politics to be doing this sort of thing, because It can and does influence people and regular voters can't compete with financial industries or corporations that have enough cash to deal out large speaking fees. Ifhe's sort of walking away from it I don't care.
But if he's really looking to find the "next generation of leadership" I guess I don't want to be asking the question, should this become a regular thing, were the type of leaders he sought out or help try and elect really the best posible candidates they could be or was his judgement in anyway compromised.
Fuck me, some of you guys will he great additions to the Ideological Purity Police in any future autocratic states.
Normally this kind of vitriol is only seen shared between Marxist/Leninists & Trots, I'd never expect to see it from milquetoast US liberals over something like a paid speaking thing.
Normally this kind of vitriol is only seen shared between Marxist/Leninists & Trots, I'd never expect to see it from milquetoast US liberals over something like a paid speaking thing.
If only people got this upset at the prospect of Trump winning the election.
Bernie donated every last dime of his to the community because he's the only one who truly understands income inequality.
Oh wait.
Bernie donated every last dime of his to the community because he's the only one who truly understands income inequality.
Oh wait.
And_Gignac
Member
I am not surprised. He was a good president, but history will judge him badly regarding his relationship with plutocrats.
All ideologies are, by their very definition, purity tests. Even liberals/centrist/pragmatists who brag about not falling for that have their purity tests (heh take a look at the recent Bernie thread)
All ideologies are, by their very definition, purity tests. Even liberals/centrist/pragmatists who brag about not falling for that have their purity tests (heh take a look at the recent Bernie thread)
They'd ignore it regardless. Or they'd find some mundane thing and accuse her of wrongdoing, like they literally did for over two decades.
I mean, this particular speech, who knows, but Obama will be putting a ton of money into many, many foundations and charities for the rest of his life.
jungomitis
Member
Wall St. makes the retirement fund, mortgages, and my education endowment possible!
What if he takes the 400k and then uses it for a cause?
theclosetfan
Member
To everyone complaining about this. Whose your favorite far left rails-against-the-fat-cats liberal?
Noam Chomsky?
Ralph Nader?
Cornel West?
They all get 15k-30k for an hour long speech. That's the business. It's crazy, but schools, conferences, business associations, etc. pay big for even mildly famous speakers. Obama is getting paid what he's worth.
Noam Chomsky?
Ralph Nader?
Cornel West?
They all get 15k-30k for an hour long speech. That's the business. It's crazy, but schools, conferences, business associations, etc. pay big for even mildly famous speakers. Obama is getting paid what he's worth.
Frozenprince
Banned
Like the man isn't allowed to have a job after being president.
Like he should work the line at Arby's or some shit.
Would it be any better if he cranked home a 6 figure salary to talk at universities? Why is it scary that he's taking money from "Wall Street" to do some speeches?
populist saviors feeding political neophytes bullshit and simplistic solutions to complicated problems resonated with many for which the world is a scary and mean plzce
No it won't.
Too busy writing in Sanders on the ballot to maintain purity.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
If I grew up poor and reached a point in my life that people paid me 400k just to show up and talk I would do it every day for the rest of my life no matter how much money I had.
EatinOlives
Member
Hit the nail on the head. People seem angry that he's making any money at all, like he's supposed to be devoted to some fanatical ideology to never make money from speaking fees, especially not those DIRTY WHORES from the financial sector! /s
I'm liberal as all hell but this shit is off the charts lmao
Ploid 3.0
Member
This will crush his chances to run for president again.
This is what I was thinking. I would love to be paid to speak to people for $400k. I'm not running for office anytime soon, or ever.
This is what I was thinking. I would love to be paid to speak to people for $400k. I'm not running for office anytime soon, or ever.
Randolph Freelander
Member
President Obama should make every last dollar he can from speeches if he's willing to give them and someone is willing to pay him to do so.
And thanks to policies that President Obama put into place, he'll pay as much as $160K just in federal taxes on this speech alone, assuming this isn't the only money he makes all year. (If it was, he'd pay $110K in taxes, before factoring in deductions).
Seems like that's his fair share. Get paid, Mr. President.
----
*Numbers rounded to nearest 10K. Assumes filing as Married Filing Jointly.
And thanks to policies that President Obama put into place, he'll pay as much as $160K just in federal taxes on this speech alone, assuming this isn't the only money he makes all year. (If it was, he'd pay $110K in taxes, before factoring in deductions).
Seems like that's his fair share. Get paid, Mr. President.
----
*Numbers rounded to nearest 10K. Assumes filing as Married Filing Jointly.
The capacity of US liberals to trip over their collective dicks is unrivaled.
CrimzonSamurai
Member
Again, why would Obama, who already has plenty of financial success on his own merits, be swayed personally by these types of payments?
Like, sure, he'll probably support candidates that people donate money to, but that's how the game is played in US politics.
I mean, even Warren has rich donors.
yup
Frozenprince
Banned
History will probably judge his foreign policy the harshest tbh.
But some e-commies thinking the world works that way is still funny.
Meus Renaissance
Member
As ironic as this sentiment may be, it is nonetheless interesting that proponents of this recognise why it might be damaging.
Smiles and Cries
Member
Not getting paid enough, should be double that 
psynergylover
Member
I'm failing to see the outrage, some people here acting like he's speaking for Briebart or something.
Frozenprince
Banned
Lord help is in 2018.
Wall Street is worse than Breitbart for some.
Did you conveniently forget that she got the most votes both in the nomination process and in the actual election?
ShironRedshift
Member
What I'm learning recently:
Purity tests over social issues like abortion: Very bad and we need to reconsider hardline stances on issues like these if Democrats want to have a chance of winning by employing a 50 state strategy
Purity tests over issues like paid speeches: Very good, and fuck it if it ends up costing us elections or whatever because ethics and doing what's right matters more, and fuck any kind of neoliberal establishment Wall Street shill that's down for this type of thing.
Good to have confirmation though that all that "lol purity tests" stuff only extends to social issues and so-called identify politics after all, and as soon as we venture outside of them, they're right back in season. Good to know, especially that these purity tests are the ones that are so important and vital that they, unlike a candidate's stance in abortion, apply when someone isn't even running for office in the first place. Glad we've got that covered.
Purity tests over social issues like abortion: Very bad and we need to reconsider hardline stances on issues like these if Democrats want to have a chance of winning by employing a 50 state strategy
Purity tests over issues like paid speeches: Very good, and fuck it if it ends up costing us elections or whatever because ethics and doing what's right matters more, and fuck any kind of neoliberal establishment Wall Street shill that's down for this type of thing.
Good to have confirmation though that all that "lol purity tests" stuff only extends to social issues and so-called identify politics after all, and as soon as we venture outside of them, they're right back in season. Good to know, especially that these purity tests are the ones that are so important and vital that they, unlike a candidate's stance in abortion, apply when someone isn't even running for office in the first place. Glad we've got that covered.
There's also a pretty big distinction between being paid to speak somewhere and other kinds of business relations. You are paid for the speech, to provide some sort of expertise to the attendees of the event.
Ex "Real World" cast members get paid thousands or tens of thousands of dollars to speak places... would anyone assume it's to owe someone a favor?
When someone is in the senior leadership of a company that has benefited from their actions and will benefit from their future actions that is clearly a conflict of interest (like Dick Cheney going from Secretary of Starting Wars to CEO of Making Money from War Incorporated to Vice War Monger).
Getting paid to speak? It's not very meaningful.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
My hate for liberals is rising every fucking day that goes by.
Miss you in gaming, dude.
Frozenprince
Banned
What there to be critical of him about? He's no longer making policy, his money is now, gasp, a special interest himself.
A) half this goes to taxes thanks to laws he helped put in place and B) if he throws his weight behind the Democratic establishment and uses this money OT leverage things how exactly is this a net negative?
And_Gignac
Member
It goes both ways. Or, more precisely, liberals and leftists have different priorities, so their purity tests differ.
old manatee
Banned
Yeah we'd be way better off in America without the left. Just the right and center is all we need.
Yoda
Member
Disapproving of his actions makes someone a Marxist? Do you even know what that term means? It's not rocket science to see what is going on:
- Person in question had enormous influence in the regulation of said entities
- Regulation was lukewarm at best, I worked at one of the big ratings agencies when Dodd Frank took effect; there was nearly no change in our day to day operations. To top of it off, there were NO prosecutions for the 2008 crisis.
- Person in question leaves office, gets paid his old government salary for ~2 hours of "work"
(I'm aware of the face this isn't quid-pro-quo that can be proven in a court of law, that doesn't make it morally permissible)
If the center left really despises the emergence of populism, this is one of the most efficient ways to make sure it doesn't fade away between electoral cycles.
Banana Aeon
Member
This purity test bullshit is really going to destroy progressivism.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked