5 ms·

Remember when a conflict of interest was so important that Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm, because heaven forbid, he accidentally made some money while presi

Remember when a conflict of interest was so important that Jimmy Carter sold his peanut farm, because heaven forbid, he accidentally made some money while president. Like his peanut farm would unduly sway government peanut policy.

somenameforme 8mo ago
An even more interesting one is that Ford was the first president to go on paid speaking tours after office. It's not like the 37 other presidents couldn't have also cashed in on the office in a similar fashion, but it was felt that such a thing would impugn the integrity of the office and also undermine the perception of somebody working as a genuine servant of the state. There has most certainly been a major decline in values over time that corresponds quite strongly with the rise in the perceived importance of wealth.
- lumost 8mo ago
  Curious if part of this was the overall decline in government compensation relative to the private sector. The president makes roughly what the typical SV engineer makes after 5 years in big tech or as a fresh grad from a top PhD program. Meanwhile the people the president deals with have become unfathomably wealthy. In 1909, the US president made 75k - roughly 2.76 Million in today's dollars. This is in comparison to the current 400k dollar salary of the president. As the president is the highest paid government employee by law/custom - this applies downward pressure on the rest of the governments payroll. I see no reason why the president shouldn't be modestly wealthy given the requirements or the role and the skill required to do it well. Cutting the payscale to less than some new grads seems like a recipe for corruption.
  - somenameforme 8mo ago
    Since 1958 with the Former Presidents Act [1] the Presidency guarantees you'll live very comfortably for the rest of your life with a lifetime pension (and even a small pension for your wife), funding for an office/staff, lifetime secret service protection, funded travel, and more. It was passed precisely because of the scenario you describe playing out with Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act
    - zimpenfish 8mo ago
      > Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office. Nope[0]. He was a shameless grifter just like Trump. [0] https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-legend-of-harry-trumans-financial-rectitude https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-le...
      - somenameforme 8mo ago
        Your source does not seem aware of the history of tax brackets. In Truman's era the top rate started at $100k income and was 90%. Even at $60k it was 80%. Those are figures from 1953, when Truman left office. [1] This wasn't that big of a deal for the average person at a time when the median salary was somewhere around $3k, but for a person with significant overhead and large, but not enormous, income -- in other words, exactly like Truman -- it was devastating. [1] - https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/historical-income...
        zimpenfish 8mo ago
        > Your source does not seem aware of the history of tax brackets. "Beginning in 1949, the president was also granted a $50,000 (equivalent to $677,000 in 2025) expense allowance, which was initially tax-free, and did not have to be accounted for."[0] That's 4 years of $677,000 tax-free which I make to be about $2.7M which lines up with "Truman embezzled about two and half million dollars, in 2025 money, from the White House expense account"[1] - "tax-free", "did not have to be accounted for" -> tax brackets are meaningless. But, you say, "the allowance became taxable later in his presidency"[0], and I reply "Truman never reported it on his tax return"[0], "and also didn’t pay the taxes he owned on the money."[1] which also somewhat scuppers the "history of tax brackets" angle, no? Further, "In February 1953, Truman signed a book deal for his memoirs, and in a draft will dated December of that year listed land worth $250,000 (equivalent to $3,008,000 in 2025), savings bonds of the same amount, and cash of $150,000 (equivalent to $1,805,000 in 2025)"[0] which I reckon comes to about $8M which, again, lines up with "Truman had a net worth of about $8 million in 2025 dollars when he left the White House"[1]. Further, further, "In January 1959, Truman calculated his net worth as $1,046,788.86 (equivalent to $11,561,000 in 2025)"[0] which, to be fair, is slightly lower than the "$14 million in 2025 dollars when he was successfully shaking his tin cup to Sam Rayburn and John McCormack in 1958"[1] but in the same "NOT AT ALL POOR GTFO" ballpark. In summary - he embezzled $2.5M, got $8M for your memoirs, and ending up being worth $11-14M within 6 years of leaving the White House and thus I rate the claim "Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office" as 100 Pinocchios. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman (look at "Financial Situation") [1] https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-legend-of-harry-trumans-financial-rectitude https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-le...
  - sgerenser 8mo ago
    Are most fresh grads from a top PhD program really making $400k/year? Sure, the ones hired by OpenAI are making at least that much, but the vast majority are not. However the broader point remains, that the president’s (and the rest of government’s) pay structure has not kept up with the private sector.
- 0xDEAFBEAD 8mo ago
  >There has most certainly been a major decline in values over time that corresponds quite strongly with the rise in the perceived importance of wealth. Are you sure that people in the past viewed wealth as less important? If anything, the 1960s hippie movement would represent a shift away from a cultural emphasis on wealth, no? I would suggest that internet commenter nihilism and politician nihilism form a self-reinforcing spiral. If commenters will take a nihilistic view of your actions no matter what you do, you might as well secure the bag. And if politicians are always securing the bag, you might as well write nihilistic internet comments about them.
fuzzfactor 8mo ago
Remember when the late President Carter was being laid to rest? There was a tremendous outpouring of grief and honor, and so much heartfelt condolences. From all over America and the whole world. Deep respect as fitting as can be for such a great human being, for the type of honest & compassionate leadership you could only get in the USA, and only from the cream that rises to the top. Every single minute it invoked the feeling that Trump deserves nothing like this ever.
- BizarroLand 8mo ago
  There will be a wild party across the globe when that man passes. Flags burning, fireworks, nude parades, more alcohol consumed than the day prohibition was lifted. Red Hats will be crying in the street while sane and normal happy people dance like it's the rapture and kiss like they're falling in love for the first time all over again.
  - exceptione 8mo ago
    I wish everyone a nice party, but the problem isn't Trump. Its what behind him: the ideologues, the power brokers and their networks, the 0.001%. Plus the masses having been bathing in culture wars for years. Trump is just good for circus, I would say the GOP can call themselves really lucky with him. His job is to successfully capture media attention, keeping what enables him out of the spotlight. He lacks all qualities, except that one ability to grab the mass media by their pussy. New craziness every day makes good headlines. Problem is that his enablers are not aligned on all core issues. Yes, you have got the Heritage Foundation which mainly wants to go back to the gilded age with a vast christian lower class. But you also have a circle of people who believe that crashing the US, including the dollar, enables them to build a US like they want. Its a weird coalition of billionaires predating on the millionaires, grifters, christian nationalists, Neo-nazi's like Miller, tech-accelerationists etc. You should fear the day when Trump isn't needed anymore. MAGA is Trump. GOP will have to shift up ideological gear after him, and it won't be as nice as Trump. Even if internal war breaks out in the GOP, it is too early for a party.
    - 8mo ago

somenameforme 8mo ago

An even more interesting one is that Ford was the first president to go on paid speaking tours after office. It's not like the 37 other presidents couldn't have also cashed in on the office in a similar fashion, but it was felt that such a thing would impugn the integrity of the office and also undermine the perception of somebody working as a genuine servant of the state. There has most certainly been a major decline in values over time that corresponds quite strongly with the rise in the perceived importance of wealth.

lumost 8mo ago
Curious if part of this was the overall decline in government compensation relative to the private sector. The president makes roughly what the typical SV engineer makes after 5 years in big tech or as a fresh grad from a top PhD program. Meanwhile the people the president deals with have become unfathomably wealthy. In 1909, the US president made 75k - roughly 2.76 Million in today's dollars. This is in comparison to the current 400k dollar salary of the president. As the president is the highest paid government employee by law/custom - this applies downward pressure on the rest of the governments payroll. I see no reason why the president shouldn't be modestly wealthy given the requirements or the role and the skill required to do it well. Cutting the payscale to less than some new grads seems like a recipe for corruption.
- somenameforme 8mo ago
  Since 1958 with the Former Presidents Act [1] the Presidency guarantees you'll live very comfortably for the rest of your life with a lifetime pension (and even a small pension for your wife), funding for an office/staff, lifetime secret service protection, funded travel, and more. It was passed precisely because of the scenario you describe playing out with Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Former_Presidents_Act
  - zimpenfish 8mo ago
    > Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office. Nope[0]. He was a shameless grifter just like Trump. [0] https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-legend-of-harry-trumans-financial-rectitude https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-le...
    - somenameforme 8mo ago
      Your source does not seem aware of the history of tax brackets. In Truman's era the top rate started at $100k income and was 90%. Even at $60k it was 80%. Those are figures from 1953, when Truman left office. [1] This wasn't that big of a deal for the average person at a time when the median salary was somewhere around $3k, but for a person with significant overhead and large, but not enormous, income -- in other words, exactly like Truman -- it was devastating. [1] - https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/historical-income-tax-rates-brackets/ https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/historical-income...
      - zimpenfish 8mo ago
        > Your source does not seem aware of the history of tax brackets. "Beginning in 1949, the president was also granted a $50,000 (equivalent to $677,000 in 2025) expense allowance, which was initially tax-free, and did not have to be accounted for."[0] That's 4 years of $677,000 tax-free which I make to be about $2.7M which lines up with "Truman embezzled about two and half million dollars, in 2025 money, from the White House expense account"[1] - "tax-free", "did not have to be accounted for" -> tax brackets are meaningless. But, you say, "the allowance became taxable later in his presidency"[0], and I reply "Truman never reported it on his tax return"[0], "and also didn’t pay the taxes he owned on the money."[1] which also somewhat scuppers the "history of tax brackets" angle, no? Further, "In February 1953, Truman signed a book deal for his memoirs, and in a draft will dated December of that year listed land worth $250,000 (equivalent to $3,008,000 in 2025), savings bonds of the same amount, and cash of $150,000 (equivalent to $1,805,000 in 2025)"[0] which I reckon comes to about $8M which, again, lines up with "Truman had a net worth of about $8 million in 2025 dollars when he left the White House"[1]. Further, further, "In January 1959, Truman calculated his net worth as $1,046,788.86 (equivalent to $11,561,000 in 2025)"[0] which, to be fair, is slightly lower than the "$14 million in 2025 dollars when he was successfully shaking his tin cup to Sam Rayburn and John McCormack in 1958"[1] but in the same "NOT AT ALL POOR GTFO" ballpark. In summary - he embezzled $2.5M, got $8M for your memoirs, and ending up being worth $11-14M within 6 years of leaving the White House and thus I rate the claim "Truman who was rather broke, and ran into financial difficulties after leaving office" as 100 Pinocchios. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_S._Truman (look at "Financial Situation") [1] https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-legend-of-harry-trumans-financial-rectitude https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2026/01/the-immortal-le...
- sgerenser 8mo ago
  Are most fresh grads from a top PhD program really making $400k/year? Sure, the ones hired by OpenAI are making at least that much, but the vast majority are not. However the broader point remains, that the president’s (and the rest of government’s) pay structure has not kept up with the private sector.
0xDEAFBEAD 8mo ago
>There has most certainly been a major decline in values over time that corresponds quite strongly with the rise in the perceived importance of wealth. Are you sure that people in the past viewed wealth as less important? If anything, the 1960s hippie movement would represent a shift away from a cultural emphasis on wealth, no? I would suggest that internet commenter nihilism and politician nihilism form a self-reinforcing spiral. If commenters will take a nihilistic view of your actions no matter what you do, you might as well secure the bag. And if politicians are always securing the bag, you might as well write nihilistic internet comments about them.

fuzzfactor 8mo ago

Remember when the late President Carter was being laid to rest? There was a tremendous outpouring of grief and honor, and so much heartfelt condolences. From all over America and the whole world. Deep respect as fitting as can be for such a great human being, for the type of honest & compassionate leadership you could only get in the USA, and only from the cream that rises to the top. Every single minute it invoked the feeling that Trump deserves nothing like this ever.

BizarroLand 8mo ago
There will be a wild party across the globe when that man passes. Flags burning, fireworks, nude parades, more alcohol consumed than the day prohibition was lifted. Red Hats will be crying in the street while sane and normal happy people dance like it's the rapture and kiss like they're falling in love for the first time all over again.
- exceptione 8mo ago
  I wish everyone a nice party, but the problem isn't Trump. Its what behind him: the ideologues, the power brokers and their networks, the 0.001%. Plus the masses having been bathing in culture wars for years. Trump is just good for circus, I would say the GOP can call themselves really lucky with him. His job is to successfully capture media attention, keeping what enables him out of the spotlight. He lacks all qualities, except that one ability to grab the mass media by their pussy. New craziness every day makes good headlines. Problem is that his enablers are not aligned on all core issues. Yes, you have got the Heritage Foundation which mainly wants to go back to the gilded age with a vast christian lower class. But you also have a circle of people who believe that crashing the US, including the dollar, enables them to build a US like they want. Its a weird coalition of billionaires predating on the millionaires, grifters, christian nationalists, Neo-nazi's like Miller, tech-accelerationists etc. You should fear the day when Trump isn't needed anymore. MAGA is Trump. GOP will have to shift up ideological gear after him, and it won't be as nice as Trump. Even if internal war breaks out in the GOP, it is too early for a party.
  - 8mo ago