If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Examiner)   The U.S. Presidents and their wealth (net worth of all 43 Presidents)   (examiner.com) divider line 67
    More: Interesting, human beings, Martin Van Buren, William Henry Harrison, President Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Grover Cleveland, John Tyler  
•       •       •

6383 clicks; posted to Business » on 19 Feb 2013 at 9:48 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



67 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-02-19 08:54:42 AM
Until Truman, Presidents were not given a pension. It wasn't until Congress found out that Mr. and Mrs. Truman were living on handouts that they Presidents were allowed to collect a pension.
 
2013-02-19 09:23:25 AM

WTF Indeed: Until Truman, Presidents were not given a pension. It wasn't until Congress found out that Mr. and Mrs. Truman were living on handouts that they Presidents were allowed to collect a pension.


They weren't living on handouts, but they were destitute and living off of Harry's military pension and the residuals for his memoirs.
 
2013-02-19 09:26:08 AM

RexTalionis: They weren't living on handouts, but they were destitute and living off of Harry's military pension and the residuals for his memoirs.


There were stories of friends giving them money or helping them pay for travel.  Handouts.
 
2013-02-19 09:30:43 AM
Also... PRESIDENTIAL NERD FIGHT!
 
2013-02-19 09:55:41 AM
George W. 35 million???   did you forget to mention the hundreds of millions if not billion, that his dad/family is worth??


indeed!
 
2013-02-19 10:03:59 AM
Washington was fun at parties.  He would get tipsy on his own homemade shine, and start yelling "I'm so wealthy, they should put my face on the money, biatches!  Woooo!"  Then shove Adams face into the punch bowl.
 
2013-02-19 10:08:11 AM
Truman was broke and near the end of his life he could not even pay his medical bills.  He was also the first person to get a medicaid card.

cdn.breitbart.com
 
2013-02-19 10:10:06 AM
Grover Cleveland is both the 13th and 15th richest president.
 
2013-02-19 10:46:40 AM
There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.
 
2013-02-19 10:48:10 AM

WTF Indeed: Until Truman, Presidents were not given a pension. It wasn't until Congress found out that Mr. and Mrs. Truman were living on handouts that they Presidents were allowed to collect a pension.


Still shouldn't get a pension.  No elected official should. They should just get a check from the Treasury each month while they are in office.  That is all.
 
2013-02-19 10:50:45 AM

Linux_Yes: George W. 35 million???   did you forget to mention the hundreds of millions if not billion, that his dad/family is worth??


indeed!


See their commentary on JFK. His family was super rich, but his own wealth level was unknown because he was young and hadn't inherited any of the wealth yet. So the family's wealth isn't listed. Also, Bush Sr. is on the list. He's worth less than Jr.
 
2013-02-19 10:56:57 AM

Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.


I don't see the methodology, but I would guess his land has increased in worth far more than the value of his debts increased.

But really... Clinton making $55 million off "speaking engagements" doesn't sound a little off to anyone else?
 
2013-02-19 10:58:27 AM

Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.


Was he insolvent or just had debt when he died?
 
2013-02-19 11:05:30 AM

bacongood: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

I don't see the methodology, but I would guess his land has increased in worth far more than the value of his debts increased.

But really... Clinton making $55 million off "speaking engagements" doesn't sound a little off to anyone else?


Not really.  I think I read somewhere that he earns about $200k per speech.  And I'm sure his memoirs bring in (or brought in) a sizable chunk of money.
 
2013-02-19 11:14:34 AM
I find the Reagan figure surprisingly low.
 
2013-02-19 11:18:55 AM

Linux_Yes: George W. 35 million???   did you forget to mention the hundreds of millions if not billion, that his dad/family is worth??


indeed!


Maybe thats just bullshiat from the war for oil crowd?
 
2013-02-19 11:22:03 AM

Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.


Actually I heard he was constantly in the black.
 
2013-02-19 11:22:19 AM

bacongood: But really... Clinton making $55 million off "speaking engagements" doesn't sound a little off to anyone else?


Nope. Dude is a road warrior.
 
2013-02-19 11:25:22 AM

Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.


I'm guessing for both he and Washington (and most of the early guys), they are taking current real-estate value of their land-holdings into account, which dramatically skews the results
 
2013-02-19 11:42:41 AM

Lost Thought 00: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

I'm guessing for both he and Washington (and most of the early guys), they are taking current real-estate value of their land-holdings into account, which dramatically skews the results


If that's their methodology, it's really flawed.
 
2013-02-19 11:45:31 AM

Tom_Slick: I find the Reagan figure surprisingly low.


Reagan got $3 million to speak after his presidency from the japanese (to thank him for opening up the US market to japanese cars).  So, yeah, $13 million is low.
 
2013-02-19 11:45:34 AM

StrandedInAZ: Lost Thought 00: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

I'm guessing for both he and Washington (and most of the early guys), they are taking current real-estate value of their land-holdings into account, which dramatically skews the results

If that's their methodology, it's really flawed.


Why is counting real assets a flawed methodology in determining someone's net worth?
 
2013-02-19 11:51:59 AM

BigLuca: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Actually I heard he was constantly in the black.


Alright, thread over.  We're done here.
 
2013-02-19 12:19:03 PM

Giltric: Linux_Yes: George W. 35 million???   did you forget to mention the hundreds of millions if not billion, that his dad/family is worth??


indeed!

Maybe thats just bullshiat from the war for oil crowd?


Most of the Bush money is from the Walker side of the family, and I would bet that is set up in trusts and not tied directly to Bush 41 or 43.
 
2013-02-19 12:31:07 PM

AntonChigger: BigLuca: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Actually I heard he was constantly in the black.

Alright, thread over.  We're done here.


IT MEANS HE HAD SEX WITH HIS NEGROS
 
2013-02-19 12:35:23 PM

Moopy Mac: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Was he insolvent or just had debt when he died?


Just in debt.  That's what happens when you buy boatloads of french wine every month.  But he was in no way insolvent and had sources of income.
 
2013-02-19 12:36:49 PM

BigLuca: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Actually I heard he was constantly in the black.


I've heard that too

/though it's difficult to trace back now
//s'okay we're moving on up,  deluxe apartment, etc.
 
2013-02-19 12:41:53 PM

stuhayes2010: Tom_Slick: I find the Reagan figure surprisingly low.

Reagan got $3 million to speak after his presidency from the japanese (to thank him for opening up the US market to japanese cars).  So, yeah, $13 million is low.


I don't see how you can come up with that conclusion.  I was surprised how high that number was. The man didn't come from money and was only a reasonably compensated actor.  The $3 million most likely got him through retirement for living and medical expenses - especially since his speaking days after the Presidency were basically over.
 
2013-02-19 12:56:16 PM
What the fark is up with the stupid basketball autoplay bullshiat?
 
2013-02-19 12:57:52 PM

BigLuca: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Actually I heard he was constantly in the black.


slowclap.jpg
 
2013-02-19 01:14:34 PM

gingerjet: Moopy Mac: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Was he insolvent or just had debt when he died?

Just in debt.  That's what happens when you buy boatloads of french wine every month.  But he was in no way insolvent and had sources of income.


He had sources of income, he just always spent more than he took in. Not just the wine, but his book collection, his art collection, constant construction projects on his houses, not to mention that the guy always traveled in style. He lived like he was slightly wealthier than he actually was, and it added up over the years.
 
2013-02-19 01:21:55 PM

Hoopy Frood: gingerjet: Moopy Mac: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

Was he insolvent or just had debt when he died?

Just in debt.  That's what happens when you buy boatloads of french wine every month.  But he was in no way insolvent and had sources of income.

He had sources of income, he just always spent more than he took in. Not just the wine, but his book collection, his art collection, constant construction projects on his houses, not to mention that the guy always traveled in style. He lived like he was slightly wealthier than he actually was, and it added up over the years.


While his expenses may have been higher than his income, he still could have had considerable net worth if his assets were very valuable. He may have just wanted to avoid selling his considerable real estate holdings.

If that was the case, he could have had considerable net worth and at the same time less income than expenses.
 
2013-02-19 01:22:19 PM
From that list I gathered that slavery was very profitable.
 
2013-02-19 01:24:59 PM
Are the Obama's paying their fair share of taxes? Do they take advantage of any tax loopholes? Do the Obama's feel guilty, and send the IRS an extra million or two in with their tax return, just to be fair? Is Obama paying a lower tax rate than his secretary?
 
2013-02-19 01:34:00 PM

RickyWilliams'sBong: bacongood: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

I don't see the methodology, but I would guess his land has increased in worth far more than the value of his debts increased.

But really... Clinton making $55 million off "speaking engagements" doesn't sound a little off to anyone else?

Not really.  I think I read somewhere that he earns about $200k per speech.  And I'm sure his memoirs bring in (or brought in) a sizable chunk of money.


Still a lot of speeches, assuming there are hundreds of groups willing to pay that price and he always demands/gets the top rate.

I have no doubt that he makes more than a pretty penny doing the talk circuit.  But I will also guess that some other investments have paid off well for him.
 
2013-02-19 01:38:35 PM
Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-02-19 01:41:21 PM
What's the demand for $200k Bubba speeches though?  I know the supply is nearly limitless, but how many organizations that can shell out for the $200k still want him to speak?  I imagine it's a one and done thing.  Does 3M pay him to speak every few years?  I figured it was once per company and then that's it.

I wonder how much nude self-portraits go for.  Makes that $35m W fortune seem low.
 
2013-02-19 01:42:19 PM

ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]


You do realize that's fake, right?
 
2013-02-19 01:42:53 PM

ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]


Yeah, BS.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/roomservice.asp
 
2013-02-19 01:50:14 PM
Conservatards are so lame.  Who would order two lobster dishes and caviar in the same meal?  And only one beverage, probably just a glass based on price.  If you're gonna lie to impugn the reputation of someone, at least make it realistic.  Make it look like she's a drunk or something.  I'm thinking surf n turf for one, six bottles of wine, and like ten desserts.  Make her look like a fatty too.  Or go full troll and give her an appetizer of white babies or something.  Pretty sure that's a popular dish in new york
 
2013-02-19 02:02:49 PM
Jefferson lived his life like he was worth $212 million, but he died deeply in debt.  His daughter had to sell off everything in order to pay off his debts, and ended up spending her final years moving between her children's homes, living off gifts of tribute from a couple states, and of course, hiring out her slaves.

http://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Randolph_Martha_Jefferson_1772-1 83 6
 
2013-02-19 02:30:25 PM

BKITU: StrandedInAZ: Lost Thought 00: Hoopy Frood: There's no way Jefferson was the second-richest. He was constantly in debt up to his eyeballs and died $100,000 in the red, in 1826 dollars.

I'm guessing for both he and Washington (and most of the early guys), they are taking current real-estate value of their land-holdings into account, which dramatically skews the results

If that's their methodology, it's really flawed.

Why is counting real assets a flawed methodology in determining someone's net worth?


It depends on how the calculation is done.  Let's say you owned $500 worth of property in 1776.  A dollar in 1776 is worth roughly $25 today.  A straight calculation of the value of the property *at that time* to today's dollars would then mean you owned about $12,500 worth of property.

Another way to calculate the value would be to take the current market rate of the land within the boundaries of the original plot.  Let's say that $500 of property happened to be a couple city blocks of space where downtown Manhattan resides today.  That would be worth several million dollars, easily.

The first calculation is more relevant.  It more accurately reflects the amount of utility available from the asset at the time and provides a picture of similar utility in today's dollars.
 
2013-02-19 02:33:58 PM
I always thought Jackson was one of the poorer Presidents. He had a reputation for being a woodsy kind of guy.
 
2013-02-19 02:38:18 PM

Infobahn: ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]

Yeah, BS.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/roomservice.asp


Even if it wasn't, I don't find it that outrageous for a woman whose husband makes $400,000/year. She probably makes some money herself besides, from speaking and whatnot.
 
2013-02-19 02:48:21 PM

ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]


My husband and I spent more than that last Saturday for our Valentine's Day dinner. $50 for a lobster and $25 for a lobster appetizer isn't a lot of money by NYC standards. In fact, its pretty average. I don't really get what the big deal is.

That being said, you can tell it is fake because no one would do "lobster hor d'oeurves" AND a whole lobster. You'd get the steak tar tar or something like that if you were also getting lobster.
 
2013-02-19 02:54:59 PM

Lollipop165: ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]

My husband and I spent more than that last Saturday for our Valentine's Day dinner. $50 for a lobster and $25 for a lobster appetizer isn't a lot of money by NYC standards. In fact, its pretty average. I don't really get what the big deal is.

That being said, you can tell it is fake because no one would do "lobster hor d'oeurves" AND a whole lobster. You'd get the steak tar tar or something like that if you were also getting lobster.


The only thing more opulent than lobster is more lobster, and the only thing more opulent than more lobster is caviar, which in case you didn't notice, was IRANIAN caviar (what else would the wife of Barack HUSSEIN Obama eat?).
 
2013-02-19 03:01:17 PM

H31N0US: Lollipop165: ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]

My husband and I spent more than that last Saturday for our Valentine's Day dinner. $50 for a lobster and $25 for a lobster appetizer isn't a lot of money by NYC standards. In fact, its pretty average. I don't really get what the big deal is.

That being said, you can tell it is fake because no one would do "lobster hor d'oeurves" AND a whole lobster. You'd get the steak tar tar or something like that if you were also getting lobster.

The only thing more opulent than lobster is more lobster, and the only thing more opulent than more lobster is caviar, which in case you didn't notice, was IRANIAN caviar (what else would the wife of Barack HUSSEIN Obama eat?).


Also $44 for champagne? Bollinger champagne starts at like $100 retail. A restaurant or hotel would normally charge three times that, at least.

Its obvs a fake.
 
2013-02-19 03:02:36 PM

Champion of the Sun: Conservatards are so lame. Who would order two lobster dishes and caviar in the same meal? And only one beverage, probably just a glass based on price. If you're gonna lie to impugn the reputation of someone, at least make it realistic. Make it look like she's a drunk or something. I'm thinking surf n turf for one, six bottles of wine, and like ten desserts. Make her look like a fatty too. Or go full troll and give her an appetizer of white babies or something. Pretty sure that's a popular dish in new york


Or use two unique signatures instead of using the same one and just scaling it down.  Or that this is supposed to be a color scanned copy of a receipt and it's perfectly straight without any speckling, lines from folded edges, etc.  Seen quite a few shops in my time, etc.

I'm pretty sure that whole receipt was meant to be a joke and the only people who think it's real are those who hate the first lady for entirely different reasons.
 
2013-02-19 03:18:07 PM

Tommy Moo: Infobahn: ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]

Yeah, BS.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/roomservice.asp

Even if it wasn't, I don't find it that outrageous for a woman whose husband makes $400,000/year. She probably makes some money herself besides, from speaking and whatnot.


Am I the only one who thinks $44 for a bottle of Champagne (even Bollinger) at the W-A seems farking cheap?
 
2013-02-19 03:37:51 PM

Tommy Moo: Infobahn: ExpressPork: Mitt Romney was, like, way too wealthy and out of touch to be pres, amirite?
[1.bp.blogspot.com image 257x400]

Yeah, BS.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/roomservice.asp

Even if it wasn't, I don't find it that outrageous for a woman whose husband makes $400,000/year. She probably makes some money herself besides, from speaking and whatnot.


I think Michelle was actually making more than Barack at the time he was elected.
 
Displayed 50 of 67 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report