“A massive transfer of wealth from middle-class, poor to the rich”

[Pelle Svanslös]

Says Obama of the Senate HC plan.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/upshot/shifting-dollars-from-poor-to-rich-is-a-key-part-of-the-senate-health-bill.html

"Thanks, bob".

[calim...@gmx.de]

Ah, do the rich get free healthcare now?


Max

[ali...@alinefx.com]

He was part of the plan to transfer the wealth, so what the fuck is he talking about, goddamn corrupt neoliberal.

[Carey]

On Saturday, June 24, 2017 at 8:05:37 AM UTC-7, ali...@alinefx.com wrote:
> He was part of the plan to transfer the wealth, so what the fuck is he talking about, goddamn corrupt neoliberal.

Mister Obama is being very well compensated by the Few now, for his good work (for them) while President™, including $3.4 million ostensibly for a speech last month in Milan:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/09/world/europe/obama-food-milan-seeds-chips.html


[shakes head]

[Gracchus]

They talk about a $400,000 speech. Where does it say 3.4 million?

[Carey]

NYeT did a pretty good job of conflating the two speeches; 400k was for a previous speech in the
States, for a healthcare™ audience. The Milan speech was a $3.4 million payoff, as I said before.

[Gracchus]

Where does it say that though? Hundreds of thousands for a speech is obscene enough, but I've never seen 3.4 million verified. Doing a search, this report apparently originated with an Express article, but there was no citation there either. It's just repeated in various blogs.

[Carey]

You are right. The couple of fact-checking sites I checked are listing this allegation as "unproven".
The organization that nominally paid Obama, Seeds and Chips, is not talking, nor is Obama.
That's odd. /s

[ali...@alinefx.com]

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/802063/Barack-Obama-speech-Global-Food-Innovation-Summit-Milan-private-speech-Wall-Street

[*skriptis]

Gracchus <grac...@gmail.com> Wrote in message:

> On Saturday, June 24, 2017 at 8:41:32 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
>> On Saturday, June 24, 2017 at 8:27:16 AM UTC-7, Gracchus wrote:
>> > On Saturday, June 24, 2017 at 8:22:14 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
>
>> > They talk about a $400,000 speech. Where does it say 3.4 million?
>

>> NYeT did a pretty good job of conflating the two speeches; 400k was for a previous speech in the States, for a healthcare? audience. The Milan speech was a $3.4 million payoff, as I said before.

>
> Where does it say that though? Hundreds of thousands for a speech is obscene enough, but I've never seen 3.4 million verified. Doing a search, this report apparently originated with an Express article, but there was no citation there either. It's just repeated in various blogs.
>

Obscene?

It's peanuts compared to Federer's or Nadal's appearance fees that
are couple of millions. I remember Nadal receiving 2 millions for
Rotterdam in February 2009.

The problem with top politicians in such situations is that, in
anticipation of making fortune after their terms end, they're
doing or could be doing in office what their future donors want
them to do.

That's why electing a billionaire, meaning an independent person
is excellent move.
Also. US president should be given proper official salary, 1
billion dollars per term is a bare minimum, so that he's entirely
independent leader.

And leading America is worth that salary. Remeber Federer earns 60
millions a year for punching a fuzzy yellow ball.



Winners of Wimbledon mix doubles tournament will earn more than US
president in a whole year. Just compare the jobs.


Of course there's going to be a swamp.


--


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/