The all-American working man demeanor of Tim Walzā€”Kamala Harrisā€™s new running mateā€”looks like itā€™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 aĀ reportĀ by theĀ Wall Street JournalĀ 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 theĀ median figureĀ for Americans his age (heā€™s 60), and even poorer than the average. One in 15 Americans is a millionaire, a recent UBS wealth reportĀ 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 $127,629Ā salary he receivesĀ as state governor, but he has elected not to receive the roughly $22,000 difference.

ā€œWalz represents the stable middle class,ā€ 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
    Ā·
    5 months ago

    2 teachers, military and Congress. Iā€™m not saying theyā€™re billionaires, or even that theyā€™re closer to one than normal.

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

        It helps me. I was questioning either the facts or his intelligence, as it doesnā€™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 somethingā€¦ I had forgot about other pensions. Scolding someone for giving information you didnā€™t want is how we got Donald trumpā€¦

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

            At no point did anyone say the article was deceptive, just that it didnā€™t dive very deep into the pension. Probably the writer just doesnā€™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 donā€™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. Donā€™t put you head in the sand, the article missed some useful detail, someone pointed it out. That is all that happened here.