If I were trying to tear the system in this country down (which I am not), I wouldn't invest in it either. He is obviously a true believer as well as a useful idiot.
I call BS on his disclosure. Where did he put the 6 figure proceeds from the sale of his house? Into a passbook savings account?
As to him being risk averse, also BS. There are plenty of people who make plain vanilla investments in mutual funds or Treasuries to avoid risk and still get a good return over time. There’s an Edward Jones office on every corner, in fact, they have 20 offices around Mankato MN where Walz lived. Did he not know that investing is available to anyone?
Having no investments as an adult tells me that he’s not much of an adult. A 10 year old with a lemonade stand is more financially savvy than he is. I’d like to hear what he thinks a market is. No way that he can accurately define it.
Whether or not Walz put the 6-figure proceeds from the sale of their home into a passbook savings account, he seems rather incurious and inexperienced regarding such investment possibilities--even if risk averse. You might be risk averse, but there is no avoiding risk.
Even the presumed risk avoidance of stuffing your mattress does not protect against the risk of loss, by inflation, theft or fire. Fixed annuities, longer term bank CDs, index funds, T-bills, notes, and bonds all contain returns to be weighed against relative risk. The choice is made in the trade-offs as between risk and return. Absenting risk is not a possibility.
As that famous philosopher, Jack Black, once said, "Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach phys ed," which is exactly what Tim "Stolen Valor" Walz did. (that's sarcasm of course. Jack Black was the main character in the movie, "School of Rock." The guy, Walz, is six eggs shy of a dozen. This, once again, was a very good column.
I heard a reference today from a source that I trust that Walz had a business (maybe relating to his teaching in China and many trips there?) that had contracts with the CCP. Did any of that make the disclosure forms? He also fits the profile of someone who would have been approached to become an asset for Chinese intelligence.
That is a really good point - it would be possible, if not likely, that any foreign investments or payments might not be picked up by our disclosure systems.
Jeff, I don't know that I would call Walz sinister for not owning anything. You sir, are of a particular personality type. You gladly accept/seek out risk (based on an assessment of risk/reward). Other personality types avoid risk, maybe almost to the degree that you seek it out. I guess I would be puzzled more by Walz' failure to plan for his children's future. Part of his lack of wealth accumulation may be due to he and his wife turning to IVF to have kids. I am told it's expensive. Who knows how often they tried.
This lack of planning for future generations is disturbing, but then if you look across the population and history maybe it's not so uncommon.
Again. maybe Walz has life insurance policies and some money in the bank. He has depended on a government check for most of his life. One thing not having money says is, at least he's honest and honest in his belief in socialism. It shows a spectacular ignorance of history and a really self-involved view of the future and other people paying for that future.
So, in sum, he appears honest and honest in his belief of socialism. It sure as hell doesn't make him right or less dangerous
There is no such thing as a politician who is honest in his belief in socialism. A politician's belief in socialism is always and everywhere about the acquisition and maintenance of political power -- putting the boot on citizens -- pure and simple. Using the word 'honest' to characterize such a belief evinces a degree of naivete that only someone living in the US (i.e. under a rock) could have.
His disclosures as so few that they are suspect. Unless you are a complete financial idiot, you have SOME emergency funds, preparation for the future, and care to keep you out of the poorhouse in old age.
Either he is REALLY bad with money (not a good characteristic for someone who may have to make decisions on how to spend the taxpayers' money), or he is concealing something.
I really don't care that his investments don't amount to a hill of beans, but I do care a hell of a lot that his stance on issues is very dangerous and he is not someone who should be in a national position of power, because he will do more damage than most.
You have a potential administration running for the Presidency from two of the worst states in the country, California and Minnesota, both of which are in dire straits when one takes a look at their big cities alone. Granted, that can be said about a lot of other states' big cities, but not many politicians in this country are as far left as the combined tandem of Harris and No Balz Walz.
They are probably the riskiest tandem to ever run for the White House.
I will say tho' that there are an awful lot of people who can't or just refuse to learn what it takes to invest. In anything. But why make the effort? The MN democommies usually throw around lots of cash (for example, the Feed My Children scandal), some of which probably ends up getting stuck between the fingers of those high enough up in the hierarchy. I don't know if she's a capable or even talented investor - I doubt it - but I just read that AOC is worth 10s of millions.
He DOES have a substantial investment, in the form of his earned teachers' pension from his years of teaching. Between my husband and myself, with our teachers' pensions, we have the equivalent of almost $1 million in investment, assuming we live to our 80s.
Any money put into a TSA - the private retirement investments generally run by insurance companies - may not be picked up via the questions asked on the form.
The spouse's investments may be covered in the form, but I'll bet their kids' aren't. Campaign funds can be funneled to people who can 'help him' later. Same with state contracts.
Either that, or he is HEAVILY in debt, which makes him vulnerable to "friends" that seem to buzz around politicians, eager to assist with improving that cash flow (i.e., Whitewater, future book deals, etc.).
My father was a teacher and mom worked as a public school secretary. Both have govt pensions, but both have IRAs. Walz hates capitalism, doesn't trust it. Hence, no money invested it
If I were trying to tear the system in this country down (which I am not), I wouldn't invest in it either. He is obviously a true believer as well as a useful idiot.
Agree not a positive to suck on the government teat for life. But you got an immediate like just for the Thomas Sowell quote.
I call BS on his disclosure. Where did he put the 6 figure proceeds from the sale of his house? Into a passbook savings account?
As to him being risk averse, also BS. There are plenty of people who make plain vanilla investments in mutual funds or Treasuries to avoid risk and still get a good return over time. There’s an Edward Jones office on every corner, in fact, they have 20 offices around Mankato MN where Walz lived. Did he not know that investing is available to anyone?
Having no investments as an adult tells me that he’s not much of an adult. A 10 year old with a lemonade stand is more financially savvy than he is. I’d like to hear what he thinks a market is. No way that he can accurately define it.
Whether or not Walz put the 6-figure proceeds from the sale of their home into a passbook savings account, he seems rather incurious and inexperienced regarding such investment possibilities--even if risk averse. You might be risk averse, but there is no avoiding risk.
Even the presumed risk avoidance of stuffing your mattress does not protect against the risk of loss, by inflation, theft or fire. Fixed annuities, longer term bank CDs, index funds, T-bills, notes, and bonds all contain returns to be weighed against relative risk. The choice is made in the trade-offs as between risk and return. Absenting risk is not a possibility.
As that famous philosopher, Jack Black, once said, "Those who can't do, teach. And those who can't teach, teach phys ed," which is exactly what Tim "Stolen Valor" Walz did. (that's sarcasm of course. Jack Black was the main character in the movie, "School of Rock." The guy, Walz, is six eggs shy of a dozen. This, once again, was a very good column.
I don’t believe he doesn’t own any financial assets. There isn’t a hint of the ring of truth to that story. He sounds like a spook.
I heard a reference today from a source that I trust that Walz had a business (maybe relating to his teaching in China and many trips there?) that had contracts with the CCP. Did any of that make the disclosure forms? He also fits the profile of someone who would have been approached to become an asset for Chinese intelligence.
That is a really good point - it would be possible, if not likely, that any foreign investments or payments might not be picked up by our disclosure systems.
Jeff, I don't know that I would call Walz sinister for not owning anything. You sir, are of a particular personality type. You gladly accept/seek out risk (based on an assessment of risk/reward). Other personality types avoid risk, maybe almost to the degree that you seek it out. I guess I would be puzzled more by Walz' failure to plan for his children's future. Part of his lack of wealth accumulation may be due to he and his wife turning to IVF to have kids. I am told it's expensive. Who knows how often they tried.
This lack of planning for future generations is disturbing, but then if you look across the population and history maybe it's not so uncommon.
Again. maybe Walz has life insurance policies and some money in the bank. He has depended on a government check for most of his life. One thing not having money says is, at least he's honest and honest in his belief in socialism. It shows a spectacular ignorance of history and a really self-involved view of the future and other people paying for that future.
So, in sum, he appears honest and honest in his belief of socialism. It sure as hell doesn't make him right or less dangerous
Respectfully
There is no such thing as a politician who is honest in his belief in socialism. A politician's belief in socialism is always and everywhere about the acquisition and maintenance of political power -- putting the boot on citizens -- pure and simple. Using the word 'honest' to characterize such a belief evinces a degree of naivete that only someone living in the US (i.e. under a rock) could have.
Not many socialist fanboys here, we slug it out in the free market place. Walz is a parasite.
"Walz is a parasite." Tough to top that, lol.
What many of us are saying is:
His disclosures as so few that they are suspect. Unless you are a complete financial idiot, you have SOME emergency funds, preparation for the future, and care to keep you out of the poorhouse in old age.
Either he is REALLY bad with money (not a good characteristic for someone who may have to make decisions on how to spend the taxpayers' money), or he is concealing something.
Linked at Chicago Boyz:
https://chicagoboyz.net/archives/71459.html
Thx! If people aren't reading ChicagoBoyz they should be
I really don't care that his investments don't amount to a hill of beans, but I do care a hell of a lot that his stance on issues is very dangerous and he is not someone who should be in a national position of power, because he will do more damage than most.
You have a potential administration running for the Presidency from two of the worst states in the country, California and Minnesota, both of which are in dire straits when one takes a look at their big cities alone. Granted, that can be said about a lot of other states' big cities, but not many politicians in this country are as far left as the combined tandem of Harris and No Balz Walz.
They are probably the riskiest tandem to ever run for the White House.
Interesting. I didn't know this.
I will say tho' that there are an awful lot of people who can't or just refuse to learn what it takes to invest. In anything. But why make the effort? The MN democommies usually throw around lots of cash (for example, the Feed My Children scandal), some of which probably ends up getting stuck between the fingers of those high enough up in the hierarchy. I don't know if she's a capable or even talented investor - I doubt it - but I just read that AOC is worth 10s of millions.
Weird! Also dumb. Good column!
A book by Walz... 😴😴😴
Haha
I don't buy it.
He DOES have a substantial investment, in the form of his earned teachers' pension from his years of teaching. Between my husband and myself, with our teachers' pensions, we have the equivalent of almost $1 million in investment, assuming we live to our 80s.
Any money put into a TSA - the private retirement investments generally run by insurance companies - may not be picked up via the questions asked on the form.
The spouse's investments may be covered in the form, but I'll bet their kids' aren't. Campaign funds can be funneled to people who can 'help him' later. Same with state contracts.
Either that, or he is HEAVILY in debt, which makes him vulnerable to "friends" that seem to buzz around politicians, eager to assist with improving that cash flow (i.e., Whitewater, future book deals, etc.).
My father was a teacher and mom worked as a public school secretary. Both have govt pensions, but both have IRAs. Walz hates capitalism, doesn't trust it. Hence, no money invested it