Question: Do you know who the richest president was in the history of the United States? You don’t, and if you do, you’re spending too much time studying history. If you’re thinking one of the Bush boys you’re way off. Perhaps it’s JFK? His family came from money. But at the time of his death he wasn’t all that rich himself. His dad outlived him, but the Kennedy family may have been worth about $1 billion all told. But JFK was just powerful, not rich. So who is it then? You’ve heard of him, and for some reason he’s on our smallest dollar bill. Yes, I’m talking about George Washington. His estimated net worth was over $500 million (in today’s money). That is at least according to The Atlantic which put together this informative list of presidential net worth. Not only does it list estimated net worth, but it also gives some of the sources of that wealth. Here are some highlights:
- Washington – Loaded, married rich and was overpaid as president
- Lincoln – One of a few with very little money, though it was popular to elect these types in his day.
- Teddy Roosevelt – Loaded
- FDR – The same
- Truman – Not so much
- Bush I and II – Neither are as rich as you’d probably guess
- Obama – Small but growing. He’s so young they’ll probably break $100 million in his lifetime (currently around $5 million thanks to his books).
This post got me thinking about some trends with our presidents. Almost all of them were so wealthy they could finance a good part of their campaign themselves. Hillary Clinton did this quite a bit, and so did John Edwards. But then again, that didn’t help them as they lost to a poboy professor from Chicago who dedicated himself to “public service”.
There are other trends with the wealthy though. It seems like as soon as someone doesn’t have to worry about money, they start thinking more important things. If you aren’t thinking about where your next paycheck comes from, what are you thinking about? For at least some of the well educated in this category, they think about shaping the world around them. This actually makes sense, and history is our proof. Cavemen would spend all day hunting for food. When they discovered agriculture, they settled down in one place and developed new tools; art and basic cultures emerged as well. In the Renaissance, again for the first time people didn’t have to worry about food. Food was in abundance for once and people were able to focus their efforts on other things.
We’re not near some new breakthrough where people don’t have to worry about something, but it’s clear that most politicians don’t have to worry about money (even though at the federal level they’re paid handsomely). This raises the question of fairness. Is it fair that only people with money can feel comfortable enough to run for office? Should something be done so that anyone can run for office or to encourage the poor to run? This is the first of a few posts in which I’ll be talking about the economics of politics. But in the mean time, read up on the presidents and so who had money, and who didn’t.
 By The Weakonomist |
The Weakonomist is the founder of Weakonomics. Clicking the picture of the puppy will tell you more about him. If you like what you're reading consider subscribing to the blog, following him on Twitter, and checking out the related posts below. Please consider a donation if you really enjoy Weakonomics. Also keep in mind that nothing I say can be construed as financial advice. |
Be First To Comment!