9 ms·
I mean, she has 33 yoe in congress and only gets paid 225k salary, she better have stocks.
by kats 5y ago
I mean, she has 33 yoe in congress and only gets paid 225k salary, she better have stocks.
- exabrial 5y agoYeah right. https://unusualwhales.com/ https://unusualwhales.com/
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- unicornporn 5y agoAre you being sarcastic?
- nomel 5y agoWith that income, she's well within the top 10%, so following the trend here, there's a > 92.3% chance that she owns stock. > Of the top 10% of income earners, 92.3% own stock (vs 94.7% in 2016). > Of the 80-89.9% percentile of income, 86.3% own stock (vs 83.3% in 2016). > Of the 60-79.9% percentile of income, 71.0% own stock (vs 73.6% in 2016). > Of the 40-59.9% percentile of income, 55.8% own stock (vs 51.8% in 2016). > Of the 20-39.9% percentile of income, 34.2% own stock (vs 32.5% in 2016). > Of the bottom 19.9% percentile of income, just 14.5% own stock (vs 11.6% in 2016). [1] Sketchy source that uses dated federal source: https://wallethacks.com/stock-ownership-in-america/ https://wallethacks.com/stock-ownership-in-america/
- Barrin92 5y ago>only gets paid 225k salary That is six times the American median wage, or alternatively it places you in the top 3% of the American income distribution. Is this a bad attempt at sarcasm? That salary, plus I assume a generous pension is enough for her to not own any stocks, which I actually think is something that should be the norm for political representatives, given the blatant conflict of interest.
- x0x0 5y agoPelosi doesn't get paid enough. She's one of the leaders of a country with a $23T economy and a $4.8T federal budget. She maintains houses in two different (very) high COL areas, and has a punishing work and travel schedule. We'd be shocked at an exec in a round C company, helping lead 100+ people, who didn't make more than that.
- cdot2 5y agoPelosi doesn't get paid enough is a surface of the sun level hot take.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- joshuamorton 5y agoIt really isn't. If your goal was to make investing while in congress less appealing, you'd pass laws, yes, but also pay people more. AoC had made the point before that if you make congressional pay too low, it becomes only feasible for the already-wealthy to maintain a political career. Also note that being a congressperson has weird extra expenses, you usually need to have two homes, one in DC and one in your home state, so expenses will naturally be higher than average. (this is one of the reasons that, e.g. Trump claiming to donate his presidential salary was frowned upon: Sure it sounds nice at first, but it implies that either he'll profit off of the presidency in other ways, or if that becomes a norm, that only those who can afford to donate their salary should become president)
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoBecause when people pass a certain wealth threshold they just say, "that's enough money, I am satisfied."
- joshuamorton 5y agoI mean...yes, many people do exactly that.