If Steyer and Yang were successful but not wealthy businessmen

[StarfishSaver]

Last edited Sun Oct 20, 2019, 12:44 PM - Edit history (1)

- if, for example, they ran small but very effective non-profits, or were excellent local community organizers - would they be taken seriously as presidental candidates?

If not, what is it about the ability to make lots of money that qualifies anyone to be president of the United States?

[evertonfc]

1. wealth isn't bad

Both appear to have made their money honestly. I mean, we shouldn't disqualify a person due to wealth. After all, many of them provide enjoyment for thousands of people and are very generous. It's better than making their fortune as career politicians on the public dole for decades. Tom is a solid guy that has been generous and spent a fortune on progressive causes and voter registration. Kudos to the both of them for their success.

[StarfishSaver]

5. I don't think there's anything wrong with wealth. That wasn't my question

There's a difference between success and wealth. Wealth is often evidence of success, but not always. Why is the accumulation of wealth seen as a qualification for the presidency when other kinds of success aren't?

[Moostache]

2. Neither one of them is qualified to be POTUS any more than Trumpy Bear was...

The myth that being able to amass wealth somehow makes one qualified to lead the country is disgusting.

I want to push the opposite direction - I want Congress to be mandated to represent the INCOME and WEALTH levels of the nation based on Median and Mean values from the IRS AND on Net Worth of candidates.

We need MORE people making $45,000.00 or LESS making decisions and LESS people making $1,000,000,000.00 or MORE, period.

Yang, Steyer, Bloomberg, anyone...its nice that you have money, now USE it for collective good instead of personal aggrandizement.

[redqueen]

4. Yang has about the same amount of wealth as Pete. n/t

[Celerity]

19. no, Pete has around 900,000 USD less in net worth, only 100,000, and Yang only has 1 million USD

in net worth. They are both amongst the least wealthy POTUS candidates (Pete is the least wealthy.)

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287317984#post18

[redqueen]

3. What makes you think Yang is obscenely wealthy?

It's not Yang's relatively low wealth (he's 3rd from the bottom of all the candidates at best) that makes him the preferred candidate for a growing number of people.

It's his ability to identify problems and formulate solutions that are not only effective but also realistic.

There is also the matter of his having such good policy positions. His A+ rating from Equal Citizens is important to me since I think that the first order of business has to be fixing our democracy or every other important program can be easily stopped or reversed by future administrations unless that is done.

[StarfishSaver]

6. Perhaps "obscenely" is the wrong word

But he is very wealthy. And his "success" as a "businessman" is judged largely by the fact that he made a lot of money.

How has he demonstrated any ability to manage a government? I'm not saying he hasn't. I'm asking the question.

[redqueen]

9. He hasn't been in any elected position nor managed a government body.

However he has said repeatedly that he would never propose to run a government like a business.

I think what a lot of people seem to be missing in this era is how much people distrust 'insiders' or the 'establishment'.

Yang is popular not because he has a track record showing what he's done but because of his vision of what can be done and his willingness to bring back Obama's message of unity.

He also shown a willingness to bring attention to issues that other candidates were not, however some have started mentioning some of them later in their candidacy. This willingness to speak frankly to people is winning him support from just about every corner of the electorate. Whether that will be enough for him to show his candidacy has legs once the voting starts is yet to be seen, but I think it's a mistake to dismiss him as a "fringe" or "one-issue" candidate. He is far from it and imo his appreciation of the issues facing the country is unmatched by anyone else running.

[StarfishSaver]

10. Thanks. That's thought-provoking

[Celerity]

18. he isnt extremely wealthy at all, his net worth is only 1 million, all it takes to get there is own

a decent house in my old neighbourhood Los Angeles (and not even an outrageous one at all.)

The Net Worth Of Every 2020 Presidential Candidate

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/08/14/heres-the-net-worth-of-every-2020-presidential-candidate/#2ce255ea37c5

[redqueen]

21. Weird - could have sworn I saw a chart that had Pete closer to 250 and Yang closer to 280 or so

[Celerity]

22. Pete and Chasen (his husband) also have a combined student loan debt of well over 100K USD

I am not sure if that was factored in, it probably was.

[spooky3]

15. Redqueen! Welcome back! I'm so glad to see you

posting again!

[redqueen]

20. Thanks!

Nice to see some familiar usernnames

[IronLionZion]

7. The Net Worth Of Every 2020 Presidential Candidate

https://www.forbes.com/sites/danalexander/2019/08/14/heres-the-net-worth-of-every-2020-presidential-candidate/#2bd526cb37c5

Yang has much less wealth than some of the leftist Social Democrats in this race including my candidate.

And DU's favorite Russian asset has less wealth than most anyone else, unless it's hidden somewhere in rubles.

[loyalsister]

8. If there were a national religion in the US

it would be the pursuit of wealth. Mega churches revel in it and wealth is an indicator of inherent goodness according to prosperity gospel.
So, it does convey a widely agreed upon superior quality.

[TreasonousBastard]

11. To get back to your question...

the answer is depressing.

"Government should be run like a business" is a false meme thrown around for years. Businesses do provide useful products, research, employ millions... But, their focus has to be on profit, without which there will be no business for long.

Non-profits, however have the focus on where to spend money, and the raising of it is a necessity, but not a scorecard. This is much more in line with the functions of government.

But, in times of crisis, we naturally tend to look toward uniformed forces and humanitarian activities are talked about, but actually focusing on Doctors Without Borders is lacking. We prefer to focus on those manly warriors keeping the world safe by blowing things up (even if they are not all men any more). Blowing stuff up is always more exciting than proving water and medicin,

So, to be as misogynistic as possible under the circumstances, the sad truth is that being successful in business is seen as being a powerful leader. Being successful organizing a nonprofit is seen as "women's work" and much less noteworthy.

Both attitudes are completely wrong, but far too ingrained.

And I didn't even touch on the idea that a hated nonprofit tends to be hated far more than a hated commercial enterprise.

So, the leaders of the NRA or Planned Parenthood don't have much chance of being elected to a national office.

[Sherman A1]

12. What is it that doesn't qualify them?

Yang is talking about what is happening and about to happen to a huge swath of working people in this country. That he is very good at understanding how screwed up "The Marketplace" and the use of GDP as an indicator of performance in the economy is why he is running and why he is gaining momentum.

[StarfishSaver]

14. I'm asking how does making a lot of money qualify someone for the presidency

Lots of people can talk about what's wrong with the economy and what's happening to working people. How does that qualify them to be president of the United States?

[Sherman A1]

16. What qualifies Yang is

he is 35 years old and a Citizen of the United States (as I suspect are all the other candidates we have seen thus far).

What you are asking is why you or anyone else should vote for him. I cannot speak to that beyond why I have chosen to support his effort.

First I heard of him was at the Brooklyn Book Festival in 2018 which was broadcast on C-Span one Sunday morning. He was on a panel discussing the future of work and the workplace as I recall and it hit home based upon my 4+ decades in retail grocery. I have seen one new automatic system (self watering produce racks, UPC Codes & scanning cash registers, palletized displays that just roll onto the sales floor & are ready to shop, pre-sorted & stacked shelf tags, pre-packaged produce & meat and U-scan self checkouts) after another be implemented through the years and we were always told it would not affect our hours. Funny thing was it always did somehow magically chip away at them and the store crews got smaller and smaller and smaller with each passing year. Yang looking into the future of the coming wave of AI and automation was something that made perfect sense along with his view that we simply are not measuring our economic well being correctly by using GDP. I listened to him then, checked out his website and never looked back. I find him to be about 3-4 steps ahead of the rest of the candidates (and certainly our Infotainment Media) in how he sees things. His web site is there to check out and you can make your own decisions as to how close he comes to what you think is important.

[question everything]

13. I don't think it is about wealth. It is about voters - worldwide- yearning for a "strong man"

(or woman) to come aboard and clean things up, shakes things the way they have done in their business.

This is why so many voted for Perot, for Trump and now clamor to Yang and Steyer.

And, of course, in this country the successful businessman and woman are admired to be followed.

As Churchill remarked:

Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

[peggysue2]

17. The wealth factor isn't the real issue

FDR and JFK were both wealthy. But both had governmental experience before running for POTUS.

I find it somewhat off-putting that two wealthy individuals have deemed themselves qualified to take on the role of the presidency without having participated in any political position whatsoever, not even at the state level, let alone nationally. It's simply another version of: anyone can do it, expertise is vastly overrated.

Qualifications for the job matter. Accumulating wealth and/or being a successful entrepreneur is not one of them.