Wow, a woman in her sixties(?) who has worked all her life has nice earrings, what a weird thing to take issue with, you should have just ended on debunking the ear piece conspiracy.
And one who was an attorney, though frequently (entirely?) in public service (DA, AG) before she was elected to the Senate. Those are not low paying jobs. Her husband is an attorney as well. JFC, it's not like she offered to bet someone $10k.
And who is the Vice President, who makes a couple of hundred thousand a year. Jeezus Melania usually wears thousands if not tens of thousands in clothes and accessories (excluding the jewelry). These people are pathetic.
No it’s fine on Melanie because she’s white. They expect Kamala to be poor because she’s a POC and all POCs should be poor and struggling according to the OPs white nationalist world view.
These are also the same people throwing a hissy fit about Kamala wearing converse exiting a helicopter for some event.
You literally can't win. Kamala is either dressed too well and detached or too casual and unbefitting. There is literally nothing she could wear that wouldn't twist their nipples one way or another.
OMG, really? Shit, I got binders full of women (😉) who wear sneakers or other comfier shoes while commuting and then change to something nicer when they get to the office. Or, I'm in tech, they just wear sneakers if they want to.
This. We aren’t in a Marxist-Leninist autocracy no matter how much the right tries to claim that’s what we are. There’s no push for our leaders to dress in plain peasant garb.
I’d be concerned if she were embezzling money from the government or something like Trump’s people did, but she is one of the highest paid members of the federal government; of course she should dress nicely!
Oh but he’s a very rich self made man, one who didn’t get ahead through inheritance and fraudulent means at all, and she’s a public servant who should live in a cracker box and wear nothing but flour sacks she’s sewn together herself.
This is just their version of the welfare queen myth. They think she’s somehow cheated the system to get rich and buy all this fancy jewelry. They for some reason lack the ability to apply the same logic to their own candidate, who got handed everything in the world and still managed to go broke running a casino.
Well, at least we understand with Melania. As someone who has spent so much of her life taking her clothes off and being naked, it's probably a relief to be clothed at this point in her life.
I work as a paralegal for a law firm- I'm a single senior. I wouldn't spend that on earrings because I'd lose them, but I bought myself a $1000 shearling jacket last year. It was a splurge absolutely, but FFS if I can manage that a pair of lawyers can buy those earrings without blinking.
I bet your sherling jacket looks gorgeous on you! I’m an upper middle-class working person with 2 kids in college. I could easily afford those earrings and I make much less than Kamala. I choose to wait until my kids are financially independent, which I expect to happen when I’m about 55, still years younger than Kamala is now. It’s simply not surprising or noteworthy in any way that she’d wear $800 earrings.
I watched a YouTube doc about the luxury brands and the big, big names don't target the ultra wealthy because they're not a large enough population to generate more than a few million a year. They get their revenue from middle class people with some disposable income who want to save up and splurge now and then... which can add up to a billion dollar industry
Single chuckle-fuck millennial homeowner. I spend this much (seperately) on my rescue maltipoo and video games. Not mention my vintage moped/antique automotive hobby. I work in film&tv which means I don't work at the moment and am broke as fuck. These people can take several seats and multiple pews.
I was going to say this. I’m also a paralegal, also single. I don’t wear earrings, but I would absolutely drop $800 on a piece of jewelry I love and will wear regularly forever. This is not a huge expenditure for someone of her socioeconomic status. She didn’t come dripping in fur and diamonds, ffs. Did people want her to wear a pair of plastic earrings from Claire’s?
They made a big fuss out of some necklace she wore to an event too, as though she’s not allowed to own anything nice even though their Nepo baby golden cow has a $60k watch on his wrist. It’s just regular ass sexism and racism, best ignored or called out for what it is. We really don’t need to do any arguing about why it’s okay for her to have that.
Yup. But she’s black and works in public service so they have to behave as though she shouldn’t have money enough for anything nice, even though she’s a hugely successful lawyer, served as AG before going to the Senate where she makes $250k a year, and her husband probably makes good money too as a lawyer. Working in public service has always been well paid at the top, because they’re being paid fairly for their industry and expertise. No lawyer would be a prosecutor if it only paid $35k a year, you have to compete with the private sector.
It’s just like how they bash on black women for getting their hair or nails done, owning a cell phone, driving a nicer vehicle, etc. because they see them all as being on welfare and abusing the system somehow.
Eh, DA pays less than you think. It’s not a low paying job for sure, but it’s also not an absurdly high paying one. Most lawyers either make between 40-60k a year or 200-240k a year. Prosecutor probably makes the lower one, AG might make the higher one, I’m not sure. But it’s largely the partners are the bigger firms who make the real dough
That was actually a big point in her winning AG the first time. It pays less than DA (at least for her opponent who was the LA County DA). He outright said he was going to double dip by taking his DA pension and AG salary. It was a turning point in the race.
Yep, this was 2010, AG paid $150k. As LA DA, Steve Cooley was making $292k, so it was a pretty hefty pay cut for a "promotion". He said he'd earned it and that AG had an incredibly low salary. Pretty tone deaf, even though true.
Damn, that’s fair. That’s a lot for a DA to make, and he had a point but outright saying “I’m going to make $440k a year at taxpayer expense” is a terrible campaign plan
Yeah, he wasn't really wrong. While $150k is a good salary for the vast majority of people, it is low for being the top attorney in the state. It also probably wouldn't have been terribly notable if he'd have left DA to work for a nonprofit and taken his pension to supplement a lower salary.
But, saying it out loud like that and with a pretty entitled "I've earned it!" was not smart. According to the NYT article, Kamala's campaign put out an ad very quickly with just that statement (it was almost perfectly 30s) with basically their last money left and it turned the tide of the race.
$292k is not a lot for an attorney with the level of experience and connections who is capable of being the district attorney. Experienced DAs can typically smoothly flip to plaintiff personal injury/wrongful death work (that area highly values trial experience) and make double or triple that.
I'll bet you'll be shocked to learn that he didn't run for reelection as DA after losing the AG race (the terms didn't align, he had 2 more years as DA) and went into private practice.
Right? They’re actually pretty modest considering their net worth. I can understand being jealous but it’s not like the vast majority of political candidates are minimum wage workers.
Lol I think you underestimate how many regular people have millions. If you said billions I could get behind you but most of the middle class has millions before retirement age. Plenty of professionals earn hundreds of thousands and save and invest to become millionaires these days. Now if you’re saying that all of capitalism/consumerism/1st world is exploitative by nature, that’s a very different argument and of it’s own class. It would include people much poorer than millionaires too.
10 years ago financial advisors were saying you needed a million dollars savings, minimum, to retire. As well as a paid off property, but now it's somewhere between 1.5 and 2.
Man you’re so naively blinded that you don’t even understand what I wrote. I never said anything about you being the same. I said it’s a really hard argument to say that someone with 3.5 million in total net worth has exploited anyone in the way someone like any billionaire has. It’s quite common to genuinely earn that through education and good, hard work.
Like I said, if you’re arguing that then you need to levee blame on people worth a lot less too, yourself included most likely - given that you have internet access and probably shower everyday.
The hell you talking about? If you have a job that pays $150K a year and live frugally, you can have a million dollars in about a decade or so. I'm sure her salary has varied over the years, but she's been working for 30+ years, and she wrote a couple of books. Do you think writing a memoir is exploitative?
I guess she and her husband have investments. I can see how that's indirectly exploitative, but not more so than the over 60% of Americans who do too. Do you consider 160 million Americans to be some kind of robber barons?? This is why I can't be a real leftist, it's ridiculous at some point.
Some people are failing at life and view anyone more successful than them as having exploited people to get it.
There's a vast difference between being a billionaire who owns companies that pay workers minimum wage, vs someone who's working in a lucrative career who has done well for themselves. Those latter people have earned every penny they've made, the former made it on the backs of both the latter and the low wage earners who produce way more value than they get paid for.
My dude, this isn't the 1900's. A million dollar for Americans who have decent paying job is not something impossible and even so it's not something you need the 'exploit the masses' to achieve.
My sister is a gp, her husband a surgeon, they make 400-500k a year together (they don't live in the US else it would be even more I assume). They have millions saved, especially since they only have 1 kid. I don't think they exploit the masses, they even work in a country with socialized healthcare.
You're confused. Millions is still relatively rich, it's billions that's unachievable without exploiting the masses. Millions can be luck or effort, usually a bit of both
My friend, we've moved past the age of penny candy and 300 dollar cars. One million dollars is far from an extravagant amount that only the top 0.0001 percent can achieve. It's still enough to put you in the top 10%, but that's still a significant amount of people that some of them are likely to be fairly normal and have gotten that money fairly.
What does that have to do with literally anything, my dude. I'm not saying that something startling or insane; one million is the floor for the top 10%, according to several sources. Sure, that's not going to be every person you pass on the street, but chances are it's a couple of them. Someone who owns their home is nearly halfway to being considered a millionaire already (considering the median sale price in 2024 was $420,000). Again, my point isn't that millionaires are all great people and should be free from any criticism, but they're nowhere near the same level of exploitation as a billionaire. You're probably closer to being a millionaire than they are to being a billionaire
I believe he is teaching law in some DC area college now. Imagine that, a relative/in-law of a executive branch officer refusing to keep working at a job that might cause a conflict of interest vs a conman who laundered money through his business while President and had a son-in-law that blackmailed Qatar into a one billion dollar bailout of his underwater building and then accepted a two billion dollar bribe from Saudi Arabia after leaving the White House.
Pod save America has an episode where they interview Doug. I didn't think I would be interested but found it pretty interesting to hear more about him and from him
Haha not racists tho, they're not racist at all! Just ask them, they'll tell you. They're not racist at all they just hate the Obama's for what they did to the country, nothing specific, but they sure did.... Uhm... Something. Worst president ever, for reasons. Really real and tangible reasons, they never can seem to articulate...
Yeah but not like, anti black racism the other racism.
Again some had very serious and well thought out criticisms of the Obama administration, like the hyper ultra inflation they caused. I knew this was happening because talk radio spoke about it non stop. Fortunately for me they had advertisers with a solution, gold! It's a great service, you send them all your money and they promise to buy gold with it. And the genius part is they hold onto all of it. They do all the hard work of buying coins and gold with my money and pass the, uh, savings onto me. That's why I was able to recoup at least 60% of my family's life savings after the catastrophic Obama hyper inflation after only keeping in the gold companies for a mere decade. An incredible return on my dollar. Not bad for a highschool drop out, if I do say so myself. Especially after the systemic anti white racism
Michelle Obama is a Harvard educated lawyer, Melanie is a nude model. There's no shame in that, but conservatives shouldn't try to pretend that it's somehow more honorable.
Not sure if it was parsley, but the cooking video that bubbled up where Kamala is showing a recipe to her neice mentioned "herbs from the garden" so who knows?
Besides, parsley is neither particularly nor space-intensive. Many herbs can be grown in a basket on an apartment balcony. If these trad-types want me to be impressed becuase We GrOw OuR oWn! I better see some actual agriculture, multi-crop, using sustainable practices. If they're selling the wool they don't need, hunting on shared lands, farming more than they need and sharing food with neighbors, they're at least doing pretend European peasantry properly. If buying the food they're putting into the $5,000, brand-new stand mixer for the TikTok, they're just filthy casuals.
That's so true, my gramma had this little planter that looked a bit like an ice cube tray that was in the kitchen window. There were many different herbs in there. I am not domestically inclined so I don't know anything about anything.
Nah. They're mad she clearly and obviously beat Trump, therefore she MUST have cheated. She's not white and a woman therefore she must be brainless therefore she must have cheated to beat Trump, in their minds. That's why they insist she got to the top by blowing dudes, why they insist she only won the debate because she had super secret James Bond earrings, why they insist that the moderators of the debate were unfair for pointing out inconvenient things.
In reality, it's Trump's supporters who are brainless and try to cheat. Trump himself is incapable of inventing anything on the fly which is why the whole debate wound up looking like Kamala saying a burn, and Trump just wildly throwing around Uno reverse cards wondering why her pawns just keep advancing down the board.
Trump is a pidgeon at a chess match, and he's used to Biden who tries to play chess and loses when he shits on the board. He's not used to Kamala, who's perfectly willing to outshit a pigeon.
Yeah, I'd say $800 jewellery is "normal" person jewellery (though a very special item for the average person).
It's something the normal person would have to save for, but unless you are on or below the poverty line is definitely a special item that would be within reach.
Tiffany is also the brand that is the special jewelry that a lot of people aspire to own a piece of. It's why the "Return to Tiffany" heart necklace is so popular, because it is affordable for something that is a special purchase, many have a tiny Tiffany diamond in them, and it's something people can wear everyday.
$800 is considerably less than a lot of engagement rings, FFS. Seconding that for most financially comfortable (or higher) people, that would be a perfectly reasonable amount to splurge on for a nice piece of jewelry. I would say that most women I know who like jewelry have something in the $500-1000 range as an anniversary/birthday/Christmas present, or as something they saved up for and bought themselves.
I was actually jewelry shopping yesterday, and a lot of the stuff with good quality stones/metal was within that range.
for sure, nothing wrong with cheaper jewellery but $800 for a pair of earrings is nothing. For a 60 year old woman in a high level career it's absolutely nothing
That was my take too. When I went through a divorce and got a new job and all that, I bought myself a pair of diamond studs for $2500 (decent size but you’d be surprised how little that gets you), and I stand by that purchase. I wore them essentially every day since then, so the cost per wear keeps decreasing. Meanwhile, the god knows how many pairs of forever 21 earrings I’ve purchased only lasted one or so wears before tarnishing. $800 is really not much for a pair of earrings like this that you could wear with pretty much any outfit, and in a style that’s pretty classic.
Yeah it's kinda nuts. My dad bought my mom a $1000 gold bracelet, and he was working as an electrical lineman, not exactly a job that easily affords luxuries.
And if $800 is truly out of reach for the majority of American families, that says more about how badly corporate America is fucking over the average American than anything about Harris being out-of-touch.
While $100,000 in debt and making $7.25 an hour at one of the 14 dollar stores in their town as they complain about the tax on the wealthy being proposed...
My mother makes a very nice salary and really like some particular of very expensive and (IMO) mostly ugly bracelets. But it's her thing! Probably like 15 years ago, my best friend and I went to Europe with my parents. My dad had to work, so my mom took us shopping. We stopped by for a 15 minutes or so in this jewelry shop, where my mom got herself an ugly expensive bracelet while my friend and I hung out and waited for her. No big deal, none of us thought anything of it. When we got back to the hotel, my dad threw a fit about how my mother could dare to spend so much money (probably also around $500-$800) on jewelry, and in front of a guest, no less. My mom and I were baffled -- my mom just said "it's my money, I earned it with my job, that I work, and I've met all my financial obligations and I get to decide what to spend the extra cash on. I'm not ashamed to let two young women see that it's ok to treat yourself with your own hard earned money."
And when Michelle Obama wore a $60 dress that she had bought online, conservatives were outraged that she dared wearing the same clothes as ordinary people and it was unbecoming of a First Lady.
It’s not that much money especially for actual jewelry.
$800 is about 3 nights at a decent hotel in a major city in the US. Or a round trip plane ticket to Europe. A bit of a splurge but not like a once-in-a-lifetime expense for average people.
Right, like Kamala was a lawyer and she is married to a lawyer. Are we just pretending that the vast majority of lawyers don't make more than the average American without a degree? Kamala could easily afford $8,000 or even $80,000 earrings.
Not to mention she’s in front of the entire world at that moment. I’d also be wearing my best, most costly outfit. The fact that those earrings are only worth $800 is more shocking to me.
Like if I was going into a presidential debate, you’d better believe I’d be wearing the best custom tailored suit I can afford because that’s the point in my life when I need to look as good as possible
Also the mean US Savings account is $8,000 so no most Americans are not struggling to come up with $800 despite what doomers will spout (avg is $62,000 - skewed by the upper class)
Not just worked all her life, worked all her life in jobs that have an extremely professional atmosphere. Of course she’s going to have nice clothing and accessories.
The whole reason they bring up the price of them is because they got owned, HARD, on the "muh bluetooth" conspiracy and now are hard pivoting to "tHe CoSt Of LiViNg!" as if they actually care about it (they wouldn't hoard all the houses and gouge people at the grocery store if they cared)
Somehow it's always women who get singled out for what they're wearing. Trump wears ridiculous suits. Hell even Biden wears a $6k watch. Have you ever seen anyone complain about Biden's watch?
Fr. Let people have nice things. If she was taking private jets across town, had slaves digging her a tunnel/basement, or other obscene rich-people behavior, then sure. Hate away. But jewelry is expensive, and people don't usually have a trillion nice pieces (even still, she's current VP, has worked in government for a WHILE and is likely well enough off from her salary to have a decent collection of nice things).
Not even that expensive really. Like there are probably a lot of women who have a pair of expensive earrings. Zales has a ton of options at that price or higher. Other places probably do too but I don’t care enough to look.
It's pretty common for Tiffany pieces to be on loan too for events like this. She was wearing a Tiffany necklace like a month ago and they made a big deal about it too. I wouldn't be surprised if they're just bejeweling her for PR. I mean, why wouldn't they want the (hopefully) first female president wearing their pieces during her campaign.
I'm going to be honest, when I heard they were Tiffany I was expecting much more expensive. My SIL is in her 30s and has multiple pieces that are around that price point and she has an 'average' job.
Even if she showed up barefoot wearing a dress made of recycled flour sacks, it would not mean that any person would have more money in their bank account. Instead, people would have less. Trickle down economics on a grand scale doesn’t work but someone had to design the earrings, make them, ship them, stock them, etc. And people are allowed to have nice things, even extremely nice things.
I know multiple women in their upper 20’s with jewelry that cost around a $1000. Most were graduating gifts or family heirlooms. Idk why that’s crazy to ppl.
It's literally the price of an iphone, it's not even crazy expensive. Price per wear is probably super good on those bad boys. As long as she doesn't lose them they will probably survive a long time.
The vast majority of Americans can't afford $800 earrings. You can be in denial or you can realize she, and all the other politicians have been fleecing us for too long.
The average 60 year old has less than $200k in savings, meaning half have less than that. And they're about to retire. It's a grim outlook for our elders.
The woman trying to give new parents 6000k in tax deductions is more out of touch than the man forcing 20% tariffs onto the American people somehow. I have this information because I paid attention to the debate and before someone challenges me on this go watch the full debate.
1.8k
u/jmurgen4143 5d ago
Wow, a woman in her sixties(?) who has worked all her life has nice earrings, what a weird thing to take issue with, you should have just ended on debunking the ear piece conspiracy.