Elizabeth Warren: "I am not wealthy"

[Trajan]

Except, no where in the video did Warren suggest she was not wealthy nor have a large stock portfolio. She clearly said she was not one of those wealthy people who had many portfolios.

Why are you people choosing to ignore plain English?

In order to go there you have to have NO COMPREHENSION of the word 'portfolio'.

Portfolio (finance), a collection of investments held by an institution or a private individual

In this usage it cannot be pluralized, the contents of the portfolio can (stocks and bonds) but the portfolio is singular only.

Sorry it is clear to me, a die hard Republican Conservative she did not say she is not wealthy.

hey, we all have them....you know?

 

[DontBeStupid]

“I realize there are some wealthy individuals – I’m not one of them, but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios"


clearly? don't be...well, you know.

It is clear, she did not say she was not wealthy. She said she is not one of those wealthy people with lots of portfolios.

Then she's an IDIOT, no one has portfolios, a single portfolio contains ALL investments.

I have multiple portfolios. Many people do.

Educate yourself.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I have two portfolios. Am I a ghost?

 

[Lakhota]

UPDATE: Warren spokesman Kyle Sullivan emails, "Elizabeth was making the point that, unlike many members of Congress, she does not have a broad portfolio of stocks in individual companies. If elected, she'll get rid of the one stock she does own."

Warren's stock, an aide says, is all in mutual funds, with the exception of holdings in IBM which she has had for decades.

From the OP link.

 

[Article 15]

Another fabricated issue, another swing and a miss.

Warren by ten in November.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Another fabricated issue, another swing and a miss.

Warren by ten in November.

And of course you missed the thread where the left was claiming a Republican said all Liberals should leave the US? Right?

 

[Trajan]

UPDATE: Warren spokesman Kyle Sullivan emails, "Elizabeth was making the point that, unlike many members of Congress, she does not have a broad portfolio of stocks in individual companies. If elected, she'll get rid of the one stock she does own."

Warren's stock, an aide says, is all in mutual funds, with the exception of holdings in IBM which she has had for decades.

From the OP link.

her spokesman, well that explains everything

how can she get rid of the one stock she owns 'with the exception of holdings in IBM '?

so mutual funds are OK?

 

[Dr Grump]

Going by the intro alone, I can see why the uber cons don't like her, which translates to she must be pretty good at what she does and righteous in the extreme. IOW, she's good people..

The Woman Who Knew Too Much | Politics | Vanity Fair

 

[Lakhota]

UPDATE: Warren spokesman Kyle Sullivan emails, "Elizabeth was making the point that, unlike many members of Congress, she does not have a broad portfolio of stocks in individual companies. If elected, she'll get rid of the one stock she does own."

Warren's stock, an aide says, is all in mutual funds, with the exception of holdings in IBM which she has had for decades.

From the OP link.

her spokesman, well that explains everything

how can she get rid of the one stock she owns 'with the exception of holdings in IBM '?

so mutual funds are OK?

As with my mutual funds, the fund managers determine the holdings.

 

[Trajan]

I didn't ask you that? did I?

 

[Trajan]

Going by the intro alone, I can see why the uber cons don't like her, which translates to she must be pretty good at what she does and righteous in the extreme. IOW, she's good people..

The Woman Who Knew Too Much | Politics | Vanity Fair

is shes so good why isn't she a recess appointment?

 

[del]

“I realize there are some wealthy individuals – I’m not one of them, but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios" she told him.

Hard to see how Warren wouldn't be, by most standards, wealthy, according to the Personal Financial Disclosure form she filed to run for Senate shows that she's worth as much as $14.5 million. She earned more than $429,000 from Harvard last year alone for a total of about $700,000, and lives in a house worth $5 million.

She also has a portfolio of investments in stocks and bonds worth as as much as $8 million, according to the form, which lists value ranges for each investment. The bulk of it is in funds managed by TIAA-CREF.
Elizabeth Warren Suggests She's Not In The 1%


She also raked in $136,000 in royalties from her books, $10,000 for lecturing at a Boston law firm, $90,000 for consulting for a Florida law firm and $43,000 for working for Traveler’s Insurance.

Let’s not forget the Oklahoma transplant earned a hefty salary for part-time government work. As a special adviser for President Obama, she was compensated $165,000 from September 2010 through August 2011 and she received $192,000 for serving on the Congressional panel overseeing TARP.
1% Elizabeth Warren can’t have it both ways - BostonHerald.com

$14.5 million all in sounds darn good to me, and makes her 'wealthy', even without a "portfolio", but you know, what? Good for her,,,

but, she should really drop the polly pure-bread bullshit.

 

[FireFly]

As I suspected. I looked at the video.

They were discussing stock portfolio's and how members of Congress should not be trading while in office. She did not say that she is not wealthy....she said that she is not a wealthy person who has a lot of stock portfolios.

Just another attempt to misinform.

Since when is a $8 million stock portfolio not a lot or not wealthy.

 

[Dr Grump]

Going by the intro alone, I can see why the uber cons don't like her, which translates to she must be pretty good at what she does and righteous in the extreme. IOW, she's good people..

The Woman Who Knew Too Much | Politics | Vanity Fair

is shes so good why isn't she a recess appointment?

Since you can't be bothered reading the OP, I'll highlight just one reason. But there are plenty more:

"Arrayed against Warren, and today against the very existence of the C.F.P.B., was the full force of what many, most notably Simon Johnson, the M.I.T. professor and former International Monetary Fund chief economist, have called the American financial oligarchy: Wall Street firms and banks supported mainly by Republican members of Congress, but also politicians on the other side of the aisle, along with members of Obama’s own inner circle."

 

[Lakhota]

Personal Finance Disclosure | Personal Finance Disclosure | OpenSecrets

 

[ladyliberal]

“I realize there are some wealthy individuals – I’m not one of them, but some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios"

"I'm not one of them" is an interjection to her main point, which is "There are some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios". Her statement is equivalent to "I realize there are some wealthy individuals who have a lot of stock portfolios. I'm not one of them." The "one" which she accurately says she is not is a wealthy individual who has a lot of stock portfolios, not a general wealthy individual. I don't see a grammatical reason to interpret her statement differently. Further, it would make no sense for her to do so-- she is surely well aware that she has publicly disclosed her wealth.

A 'stock portfolio' is a collection of owned stocks. In it's true sense, no one has more than one 'stock portfolio'. The woman told a fibber and stepped in the shit.

I disagree. Some people take "stock portfolio" to mean any collection of stocks. Then, an individual certainly could own multiple stock portfolios. Even if we take "stock portfolio" to mean (as does dictionary.com) "the complete investments held by an individual investor or by a financial organization" then an individual could still own multiple portfolios indirectly through the ownership of multiple organizations which themselves owned portfolios.

 

[LoneLaugher]

As I suspected. I looked at the video.

They were discussing stock portfolio's and how members of Congress should not be trading while in office. She did not say that she is not wealthy....she said that she is not a wealthy person who has a lot of stock portfolios.

Just another attempt to misinform.

Since when is a $8 million stock portfolio not a lot or not wealthy.

Really? Is this really what you wish to "contribute" to this discussion?

 

[Trajan]

As I suspected. I looked at the video.

They were discussing stock portfolio's and how members of Congress should not be trading while in office. She did not say that she is not wealthy....she said that she is not a wealthy person who has a lot of stock portfolios.

Just another attempt to misinform.

Since when is a $8 million stock portfolio not a lot or not wealthy.

since someone else, like anyone who is a gop'er has more

 

[ladyliberal]

frankly I think the sentence was very poorly constructed, its almost gibberish, the first portion makes complete sense, the back end? *shrugs* if she left out the BUT, maybe I could see it that way.

I give politicians a lot of credit for backtracking midstream when they realize thy have said something they probably should not have said.


whats a 'general wealthy' individual?

I agree that the sentence was not very well constructed. I think that's understandable in a live interview-- I'm sure if someone took a transcript of everything I said aloud much of it would be ungrammatical.

By "general wealthy individual" I meant any wealthy individual, as distinct from the specific case of a wealthy individual with many stock portfolios.

 

[Amelia]

UPDATE: Warren spokesman Kyle Sullivan emails, "Elizabeth was making the point that, unlike many members of Congress, she does not have a broad portfolio of stocks in individual companies. If elected, she'll get rid of the one stock she does own."

Warren's stock, an aide says, is all in mutual funds, with the exception of holdings in IBM which she has had for decades.

From the OP link.

That's mildly amusing in light of the people here trying to defend Warren based on her use of the letter 's' at the end of the word 'portfolio'.




She made a booboo - brought on by her liberal need to be one with the middle classes.

Now her spokesman is walking it back for her.

At least he's not claiming her defense is that she only has one portfolio not a lot of those little suckers.