Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won plaudits from critics for saying her congressional salary is her only income and she doesn't trade stocks.

Summary

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez denied claims that she is secretly wealthy, stating she is worth less than $500,000 and doesn’t trade stocks or take corporate money.

Her financial disclosures show modest savings and student debt.

Some conservatives on X, despite opposing her politics, praised her perceived integrity.

Accusations of political corruption have surged online, partly fueled by Elon Musk.

  • null@slrpnk.net
    3·
    2 hours ago

    There is something wrong with being a lawmaker who is so out of touch with poor people that you dont realize your own privileges

    What are you basing this on? Did you personally speak with AOC?

    • jagged_circle@feddit.nlEnglish
      14·
      2 hours ago

      In the article she said she has hundreds of thousands of dollars and also said she’s not rich

      Edit: she didn’t say she’s not rich. She said she’s not a millionaire

      • ContriteErudite@lemmy.world
        3·
        1 hour ago

        You may be misunderstanding the difference between assets and liquidity. These days, owning a home, a car, and paying into a retirement fund for a few years can easily put someone close to having $500,000 in assets. But those aren’t liquid, i.e. they do not translate into having $500,000 in a bank account. Most people that have that much in assets will also have a lot of debt; take into account the mortgage on their house, student loans, car loans, and credit cards, the average person with $500,000 in assets actually has a negative net worth.

        Compare AOC to someone like Nancy Pelosi, who has an estimated net worth over $240,000,000, with most of it bound in stocks and bonds that could quickly translate into liquidity. That is what being rich is. That is the kind of person that is out of touch with poor people.

        • null@slrpnk.net
          2·
          58 minutes ago

          He’s not misunderstanding anything, he’s deliberately arguing semantics to avoid addressing his nonsense claim that AOC is problematic.

          AOC never even said she wasn’t rich, so it’s a totally irrelevant argument.

          • ContriteErudite@lemmy.world
            2·
            44 minutes ago

            I getcha, and you’re most likely right; if OP sees the gap in their argument and realize it, that’s just a bonus. My real intent is to share a broader perspective with people coming to the comments with genuine curiosity and an open mind.

      • null@slrpnk.net
        2·
        2 hours ago

        Lol so you were indeed lying, based on your edit.

        So what’s the basis for your claim, then? That she’s so out of touch with poor people that she doesnt realize her own privileges?