The all-American working man demeanor of Tim Walz—Kamala Harris’s new running mate—looks like it’s not just an act.

Financial disclosures show Tim Walz barely has any assets to his name. No stocks, bonds, or even property to call his own. Together with his wife, Gwen, his net worth is $330,000, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal citing financial disclosures from 2019, the year after he became Minnesota governor.

With that kind of meager nest egg, he would be more or less in line with the median figure for Americans his age (he’s 60), and even poorer than the average. One in 15 Americans is a millionaire, a recent UBS wealth report discovered.

Meanwhile, the gross annual income of Walz and his wife, Gwen, amounted to $166,719 before tax in 2022, according to their joint return filed that same year. Walz is even entitled to earn more than the $127,629 salary he receives as state governor, but he has elected not to receive the roughly $22,000 difference.

“Walz represents the stable middle class,” tax lawyer Megan Gorman, who authored a book on the personal finances of U.S. presidents, told the paper.

  • Bgugi@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    3 months ago

    2 teachers, military and Congress. I’m not saying they’re billionaires, or even that they’re closer to one than normal.

    • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Nitpicking his income stream - which is not his net worth - serves no point here. You’re doing a “well AKSHOOALEE” that is not only irrelevant but in service of…what? What’s the point you’re making?

      • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It helps me. I was questioning either the facts or his intelligence, as it doesn’t seem like he has enough money to buy/rent a house when he leaves the governors mansion with no income. I was wondering if he gets his governor pay for life or something… I had forgot about other pensions. Scolding someone for giving information you didn’t want is how we got Donald trump…

        • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          You (and the person I was responding to) didn’t ask anything, you are making an assertion and implied he/the article is being deceptive. That is not the same thing.

          That Trump comment is so forced and makes no damn sense. We got Trump because people can’t ask questions (which again you didn’t even do)? Give me a break. What does that even mean?

          • Modern_medicine_isnt@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            At no point did anyone say the article was deceptive, just that it didn’t dive very deep into the pension. Probably the writer just doesn’t know much about them. Which is sad. Journalists used to be allowed the time to learn up on things for an article. So you are defending the article from a perceived complaint that no one made. You just don’t want to hear anything bad about the article you liked. Just like trump was never told he did anything wrong while growing up. That is the connection. Don’t put you head in the sand, the article missed some useful detail, someone pointed it out. That is all that happened here.

          • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Sure, but when you’re taking about Americans at retirement age, net worth is important because it allows you to retire comfortably. That’s why they tie together in most folks mind instead of focusing on pure income or net worth. He’s got a reason to have a lower net worth and still be comfortable.

                • SteveFromMySpace@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  The discussion is about net worth and the article explicitly states their annual income which includes the pension. I don’t understand the issue. What’s not being included? What’s being omitted? What is the problem? What do you want to see differently?

                  • ✺roguetrick✺@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    3 months ago

                    The article talks about nest eggs and compares him to people in his age group while obliquely talking about his income. It’s relatable to retirement planning and that’s why pensions are important. They’re explicitly income you don’t have to work for and a form of building a nest eggs. It’s important to talk about them in this context.