Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton is now taking on the “one percenters” of which she is obviously one of the elitists’ group. According to a Business Insider report on Tuesday, Clinton is taking a populist stance by implying that the United States economy needs to take down – or “topple” – the top one percent. The somewhat disturbing sentiment, considering her financial gains through recent decades, was given during a meeting with economists.
Clinton made the assertion when viewing a chart that showed how financial gains for the highest money-earners in the United States have greatly increased in recent years. Of course, Clinton – as well as her husband, former President Bill Clinton – are two of those highest money-earners themselves. The chart, entitled “The World Top Incomes Database,” was developed by Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez and their cohorts. They’re all economists. Their database or chart regarding income tax from several countries around the globe analyzes the incomes of “the wealthy” people, according to Yahoo Finance News.
According to the New York Times, Clinton has made the anti-one-percenter her calling during her first week of being officially out on the campaign trail. She actually said, “The deck is stacked in their favor” – meaning the top one percent – when, more accurately she should use the pronoun “our.” She acclaims that she is the one who will change this. As she said, “My job is to reshuffle the cards.” Many are asking, “Really, Hillary?” Many find it to be incredibly ironic that Clinton would allow herself to become headlined as the one who wants to topple the one-percent in the nation. While the point is well-taken that there is more and more of a divide between the nation’s and the world’s wealthiest people as compared to the rest of the members of societies, how can a person as wealthy as Clinton possibly champion this cause effectively?
The analysis of the financial data is fairly simple to accomplish. It is clear that the significant gains made by the bottom 90 percent from the late 1930s through the early 1970s have stagnated in the past 40 years. However, those in the elite one-percent category have seen a great increase in personal wealth since the mid-1980s. Granted, the differentiation between the “haves” and “have-nots” ought to be highlighted and addressed – but by a person who reportedly, for no other reason than to make herself wealthier and wealthier, has repeatedly made $200,000 or more for an hour-long speech? Could she possibly think that people don’t know her past and present – and will actually think she is one of them? It doesn’t seem possible. Certainly, there must be a cause she can champion with a straight face and in which her public will take her self-asserted concern seriously.
So, how much is Hillary Clinton (the Clintons) worth? It depends on who you listen to regarding the wealth of the former First Couple. As can be expected, the more recent the data, the more the Clintons are worth. On the high end, Rush Limbaugh claims that the Clintons are worth somewhere between $150 million and $200 million. Others, such as David Manuel whose data goes back a few years to when Hillary was the U.S. Secretary of State, put Hillary’s wealth at that time at $21.5 million and Bill’s at $55 million – making former President Bill Clinton one of the wealthiest presidents in history.
Controversially, the bulk of the Clintons’ wealth is said to be from contributions made to them or their foundation in recent times. The controversy, naturally, is any suggestion that Hillary Clinton will owe “favors” to those who contributed to her handsomely in hopes that she will become the president of the United States. These controversies about the incredible Clinton wealth are expected to become a huge part of the debate as the 2016 election approaches.