U.S. Wealth Inequality

David Pakman talks about wealth inequality. In the video, he claims that the wealth of the top 0.1% is about to overtake the bottom 90% for the first time since 1929 in the U.S.

More info:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2014/11/daily-chart-2

Republicans Will Go For The ‘Hypocrisy’ Angle

Republicans will go for the “hypocrisy” angle with Hillary Clinton…and it will be easy to do.

Fox News’ Bill O’Reilly comments on it.

O’REILLY:  “…if Hillary Clinton runs for president, how can she even mention income inequality?

“Mrs. Clinton gets paid about $200,000 for a speech. And she flies to the venue in a private jet. And you know what; there is nothing wrong with that. Bill and Hillary Clinton have a unique position in the world and many people want to hear what they have to say. Mrs. Clinton also has a new book out for which she was paid more than $10 million — again, nothing wrong with that. Publisher believing it will make money selling Hillary’s book. That’s capitalism.

“But it also takes away a big issue that the Democratic Party is pushing in order to retain political power — inequality. For her book alone Mrs. Clinton is making more money than most Americans will make in their entire lifetimes. So, if you want an example of income inequality, I believe Hillary Clinton is the poster lady. In fact, she didn’t even write the book. Others did. She provided notes, guidance, point of view, but she did not put the words on the paper — again, nothing wrong with that.

“So, if I’m reading this correctly, Mrs. Clinton might want to think about running for president on the Republican ticket. She is obviously worried about taxes, obviously a hard worker. And she is making Romney- type money in the free marketplace, is she not?

“Also, she doesn’t feel guilty about it. She is a one percenter. She has far more cash than most Americans even dream of having.

“Now, if Mrs. Clinton does run as a liberal Democrat and does start spouting income inequality, ‘Talking Points’ will be offended. If you really believe that capitalism is distorted, a bad thing, because it provides the opportunity to make millions, then you can’t be vacuuming up the money. That would be hypocritical.

“If the Clintons want to give the money to charity, that’s another story. But at this point, Bill and Hillary are living very well — giant homes, private jets, every luxury — again, nothing wrong with that. They earned it.

“FINALLY, A PIECE OF ADVICE TO THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY: if Hillary is your nominee, stow the income inequality stuff. It’s not going to play with the folks.”

It is not clear what “folks” he is talking about.  However, he makes it clear that he believes that a wealthy person who talks about income inequality is – de facto – a hypocrite.

Does the O’Reilly piece give a sense of what is to come? Will pointing out “income inequality hypocrisy” become a conservative talking point?

Never mind that some of the wealthy seem fine with paying more taxes and consider it “paying their fair share.”  Never mind that they want health care for all.

But does O’Reilly have a point?  Will Republicans go for the “hypocrisy” angle?

Inquisitr states:  “If she runs for president, Hillary Clinton apparently plans to make income inequality a cornerstone of her campaign. The Clintons reportedly have a net worth of $100 million to $200 million, much of it from $200,000 a pop speechmaking before corporate groups.”

The Guardian states:  “But the mantle of class warrior has always fit poorly on Hillary’s shoulders…The missteps on the $225,000-a-speech Hard Choices campaign echo that fundamental problem with Hillary’s first run at the presidency: she is an insider who claims to be an outsider.”

Will Hillary be able to take up the cause of income inequality?  Equally important, will she be able to fend off attacks and charges of hypocrisy?

http://www.inquisitr.com/1396848/income-inequality-activist-will-get-paid-200k-to-teach-one-course/#AIlKAse6kk7iTqmY.99