logo
Entitled Michelle Obama is slammed for whining about food and travel costs while she lived in White House

Entitled Michelle Obama is slammed for whining about food and travel costs while she lived in White House

Daily Mail​04-05-2025
Michelle Obama has faced backlash for complaining about the costs associated with moving into the White House when her husband Barack became president.
The former First Lady appeared on the Diary of a CEO podcast on May 1, sharing new insight into her marriage as the couple fend off rumors they're headed for divorce.
The Obama's estimated net worth ranges between $70 million to $135 million, making him among the richest presidents to leave office - trailing behind both Donald Trump and Bill Clinton.
But Michelle noted on the podcast that this wasn't always the case, and that when they actually got into the White House, the costs could stack up quickly.
'Because it's expensive to live in the White House. Many people don't know, but much is not covered,' she said.
'You're paying for every bit of food you eat. You're not paying for housing and the staff in it but everything, even travel.
'If you're not traveling with the president, if your kids are coming on Bright Star - the First Lady's plane - we had to pay for their travel to be on the plane.'
Her comments have horrified critics online who have accused her of being out of touch, given her husband's salary alone in the White House placed him among America's top 97 percent of earners.
'They have no real conception of the word 'struggle' or ever experienced any type of real-life struggles like Americans are experiencing today,' one critic wrote on X.
'Most of us have to pay for our own food & transportation in addition to rent/mortgage, utilities, insurance, healthcare, etc. What makes you so special?' another asked.
'This is a really bad look and is going to fall flat if she wanted to garner sympathy. No one in America gets anything for their family for free because of their job.'
When Barack initially told her he wanted to run for office, one of her initial thoughts was questioning how they could afford it.
'You're running for two years and not earning an income,' she added. 'How would we manage this?
'Maybe way in the back of my mind, I was hoping he wouldn't [win.] But I knew he had it in him, to win.'
Upon entering office, the Obama's had an estimated net worth of $1.3 million. By the time Barack handed over the keys to Trump, his fortune had reportedly skyrocketed to more than $12 million.
The couple have both released memoirs, signed a production deal with Netflix and are regularly engaged to participate in speaking events across the nation.
Michelle has since launched her own podcast, and all former presidents earn a six-figure pension upon leaving office.
Between 2005, when Barack joined the Senate, to 2016, when he departed the White House, the couple had earned a total of $20.5million.
That includes Obama's salary of $400,000 annually for the eight years he served as leader.
Since leaving office, Barack can - and reportedly has - charged upwards of $400,000 per speaking engagement, while Michelle can command about $225,000.
The lion's share of their fortune comes from those book deals, speaking engagements and a series of property investments they've made over the years.
The couple still own their home in Chicago's Hyde Park which they bought for about $1.65 million in 2005 with a $1.3 million mortgage. The property is now estimated to be worth about $2.5millin.
They also purchased a sprawling 8,200-square-foot mansion in Washington, DC, for $8.1 million after leaving the White House.
The couple have also been renovating a home in Oʻahu in Hawaii since they purchased the land in 2015 which is now estimated to be worth as much as $18 million.
And in 2019, the Obamas reportedly purchased a house in Martha's Vineyard for $11.75 million.
While in office, presidents and their families enjoy a raft of perks, including free lodging and bills associated with upkeep, a free security detail and the use of Air Force One - the president's plane.
But several former First Lady's have shared details about what is not covered that caught them by surprise.
Michelle first revealed that food was not covered during a 2018 appearance on Jimmy Kimmel.
'It's a little shocking, because no one tells you this stuff,' she said.
'Rent is free, staff is free - we shouldn't be mooching off of the taxpayers.'
When a president goes on vacation, costs of security and travel are covered, but the bill for a hotel or any food and incidentals must be covered privately.
And they're still responsible for covering household expenses like stocking up on toilet paper, toothpaste and garbage bags.
Former first lady Laura Bush wrote in a memoir that it is 'more than fair that they pay for personal items like every American household.'
But she said she was 'amazed by the sheer number of designer clothes that I was expected to buy, like the women before me, to meet the expectations for a first lady.'
Any private parties held within or outside of the White House must also be paid for by the family.
Michelle's latest revelations about life in the White House come as she and Barack fend off rumors they're headed for divorce.
The couple have been plagued by speculation since Barack attended both Jimmy Carter's funeral and Trump's inauguration solo back in January.
Michelle has repeatedly insisted in recent months her decision not to attend the DC events was one she made in her own best interests, and she was shocked to discover the enduring fallout.
'That's the thing that we as women, I think we struggle with disappointing people,' she said on one podcast.
'I mean, so much so that this year people were, you know, they couldn't even fathom that I was making a choice for myself that they had to assume that my husband and I are divorcing,' Michelle continued.
'That this couldn't be a grown woman just making a set of decisions for herself, right?'
At the time, Michelle's team said she missed Carter's funeral due to 'scheduling conflicts,' blaming her absence on a preplanned holiday vacation in Hawaii.
And last week during the podcast with entrepreneur and investor Steven Bartlett promoting her own new show, she again swatted away any suggestion she and Barack are unhappy.
'If I were having problems with my husband, everybody would know about it,' she said, laughing.
She added that she's 'not a martyr' and joked about how she would address such marital strife publicly.
Her brother Craig Robinson also chimed in, adding: 'If they were having a problem, I'd be doing a podcast with him.'
Michelle acknowledged that marriage is 'hard' for her and the former president but added that 'I wouldn't trade it,' calling President Obama, 'as the young people say... my person.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Why Sussexes' new Netflix deal might not be the demotion the critics want it to be
Why Sussexes' new Netflix deal might not be the demotion the critics want it to be

Sky News

time2 hours ago

  • Sky News

Why Sussexes' new Netflix deal might not be the demotion the critics want it to be

While we're all desperate to know what this new deal is really worth in dollars and pounds, one thing I can tell you for certain is that Prince Harry and Meghan want us to know they're delighted that Netflix again wanted to get a deal done. "Absolutely over the moon" is how it was described to me. But they'll also be aware of the attention it'll attract as we all try to pick apart what it means. Firstly because of that ongoing fascination in how they're making money since stepping away from royal life and losing financial support from the King, but also because of the recent reports that Netflix were intending to cut ties. Yes this is a different type of deal from their original one in 2020. Some have argued that a "first look deal" looks like a demotion from what they previously signed up to. With no real clarity on how much their original deal was worth, and no numbers being publicly thrown around this time, that is hard to judge. But talking to those who know something about these kinds of deals you do get a sense it could potentially be more lucrative than it looks on face value. With first look deals, yes there is often financial commitments from the likes of Netflix to get that first exclusive look at projects and first refusal. 2:22 But there could be other significant monetary incentives for the Sussexes to sign. For example, when the Obamas signed a first look deal with Netflix, the streaming service agreed to pay the operational costs for their production company "Higher Ground". Could it be that Netflix are also now covering the costs of Archewell Productions? It's stating the obvious to say that Harry and Meghan continue to divide opinions, some wanting to watch their programmes from a place of respect and fondness, others as a reason to grumble about them.

What to expect of Trump, Putin summit in Alaska on Ukraine
What to expect of Trump, Putin summit in Alaska on Ukraine

The Herald Scotland

time2 hours ago

  • The Herald Scotland

What to expect of Trump, Putin summit in Alaska on Ukraine

Since February 2022, the conflict has been a slow, grinding war of attrition in which Russia has gradually seized more and more Ukrainian territory. Russia's military progress dampened its incentives to escalate the conflict, an early source of U.S. concern. For example, in the fall of 2022, the high-water mark for Ukraine on the battlefield, U.S. intelligence estimated that there was a 50% chance Russia would reach for nuclear weapons if its forces in southern Ukraine were facing collapse. Were Russia losing today, the risks for Americans would be higher. Putin's will vs. Trump's way While Russia's progress has limited the risk of escalation, it has also increased Moscow's willingness to continue fighting. Since beginning his second term, Trump has tried to find a way to end the war, but the Kremlin has not shown much willingness to moderate its demands. Putin has insisted on Ukraine renouncing aspirations to join NATO or allow NATO forces on its territory; conceding Russian sovereignty over the four provinces it annexed in 2022; the demilitarization of Ukraine; and the "denazification" of the country, by which it means dramatic reforms to how it governs itself domestically. Putin has also rejected a temporary ceasefire that doesn't engage on these issues. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. The debate over the what to do next often obscures more than it reveals. One hears reference to Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat without defining what those terms mean or what their implications would be. Does Ukrainian victory or Russian defeat mean Kyiv regaining all territory inside its internationally recognized borders? That isn't going to happen. Could Ukraine losing territory but keeping its sovereignty and military - without NATO membership - be portrayed as success? Many security scholars believe that such armed neutrality is the best that can be achieved for Ukraine. Opinion: I was the US ambassador to Ukraine. Here's why I resigned. Don't forget Zelenskyy's intransigence This is where Ukraine's intransigence comes in. Even though Ukrainian public support for continuing the war has cratered, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy is using the Ukrainian Constitution as a firewall against concessions. As amended in 2019, it both prohibits the Ukrainian government from ceding any territory and somewhat clumsily commits it to pursue membership in NATO. In rejecting Trump's suggestion that there be land swaps as part of a settlement, Zelenskyy pointed at the constitution's provision against giving up territory, arguing that "no one will step back from this, nor will anyone be able to." The Ukrainian president's willingness and ability to end the war probably has less to do with high-minded constitutional principles and more to do with his own political survival. At this point, the war has produced total destruction in Ukraine, the evisceration of its territory, and all the ruinous human and economic costs of the war - but without any U.S. security guarantees. Zelenskyy knows this would be a disastrous legacy, so he has a powerful incentive to obtain something he can portray as a benefit of the war. Gen. Wesley Clark: Trump needs to push Putin hard to end war in Ukraine - now | Opinion The question is whether Kyiv's position on the battlefield can sustain Zelenskyy's intransigence on the political issues, with or without more U.S. support. There are worrying signs that it cannot. Ukraine faces an array of manpower issues along the 600-mile front. Key towns seem to be in jeopardy. Time is not on Ukraine's side. As always, the Europeans are doing everything in their power to keep the United States at the center of the war in Ukraine - and as the central provider of regional security. They called a virtual meeting with Zelenskyy and Trump two days before the Putin summit, and proposed a plan for Ukraine that would involve potential NATO membership in exchange for Kyiv conceding that it lost territory. After the meeting on Aug. 13, French President Emmanuel Macron and European Council President Antonio Costa indicated Trump committed that the United States would participate in security guarantees for Ukraine. However, Trump has previously resisted European pleas for U.S. security guarantees to Ukraine, and make no mistake: That is just what NATO membership would be. With two consecutive U.S. administrations revealing that Washington does not perceive an interest in Ukraine worth fighting Russia over, such a commitment would be inherently incredible. In the coming days, avoiding any traps laid by the Europeans, the Ukrainians or congressional hawks is essential. From a U.S. perspective, patience and low expectations are the right course for talks with Russia. Above all, Trump must avoid backing into a reboot of the Biden administration's Ukraine policy, which involved an endless flow of weapons and hoping for a miracle. America's resources for and interests in the war in Ukraine are limited. Trump's policy should reflect that. Justin Logan ( @justintlogan ) is director of defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute.

Netflix hikes prices again for Aussies
Netflix hikes prices again for Aussies

Daily Mail​

time11 hours ago

  • Daily Mail​

Netflix hikes prices again for Aussies

Published: | Updated: Netflix has quietly increased its prices in Australia, with viewers set to fork out almost $30 a month for its premium subscription. All Netflix account holders will be affected, no matter what subscription plan they are on. Viewers who are on the streaming platform's two standard options will be slugged an extra $2 a month. This means, those who are on the cheapest option - the 'standard with ads' - will see an increase in their monthly bill from $7.99 to $9.99. Those who are on the standard, ad-free plan will see their monthly bill rise from $18.99 to $20.99. Viewers who have opted for Netflix's premium plan will be hit with the biggest hike, with $3 being added to their monthly bill. The premium plan will now cost $28.99, up from $25.99, a 26 per cent jump since its last price rise in May 2024. The platform will also add an extra $1 for viewers who want to add an extra member to any of their plans. It will now cost viewers $6.99 per month to add an extra user to the standard plan with ads, up from $5.99, and $8.99 for the standard plan without ads, up from $7.99. 'We offer a range of prices and plans to meet a wide range of needs, and as we deliver more value to our members, we occasionally ask them to pay a bit more,' Netflix said in a statement. 'We're adjusting prices in Australia, with plans starting at $9.99AUD.' Existing customers will be sent an email notifying them of the price rise before their monthly bill is adjusted. In February this year, the streaming giant also axed its basic plan, making it more expensive for users to enjoy content without ads. Netflix has steadily moved away from its budget-friendly roots, having hiked prices a total of six times since its launch in Australia in 2015. The cost of Netflix's cheapest plan has jumped a whopping 43 per cent in just over 12 months when combined with the price change in May 2024. The company also monetised account sharing - which used to be free - and phased out its most affordable ad-free option. When Netflix first launched its 'basic' and ad-free subscription was only $8.99, while its premium was a measly $14.99 compared to today's price of almost $30 a month. In 2023, Netflix also cracked down on account holders sharing passwords between households. The platform emailed Aussie viewers in May 2023, explaining an account was only for the people within their home. 'Your Netflix account is for you and the people you live with – your household,' Netflix warned. The latest price increases have put Netflix at the top of the list for most expensive mainstream subscription video services in Australia. In comparison, Stan costs viewers as little as $12 for its basic plan, $17 for its standard and $22 for its premium subscription. If viewers want to add Stan Sports to their account, it is an additional $20 per month. Meanwhile, HBO Max offers a basic plan with ads for $11.99 a month, a standard plan for $15.99 and a premium plan of $21.99 a month. Viewers who prefer Paramount+ are also paying less, with monthly basic - with ads - plans from $10, a standard plan costing $19 and a premium subscription at $13.99. Binge offers viewers the choice of $10 a month for its basic with ads subscription, $19 for its standard and $22 for its premium plan. Disney+ offers viewers the option between two plans - $15.99 for the standard and $20.99 for the premium. Prime Video also offers a flat monthly fee of $9.99, while BritBox offers $8.99 a month. Netflix's latest price push also comes as the streamer renegotiates deals with some of its high-profile talent including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The new scaled-back agreement is a 'first look' style deal, rather than the couple's previous multimillion-dollar exclusive agreement. The couple confirmed on Monday that Netflix will be given the opportunity to view and potentially buy any future productions before the pair offer it to other platforms.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store