Inequality for All Page #7
was borrowing, going into debt,
which seemed easy because
For 13 years, Americans
the longest ever.
This a great time
to buy a house in Delray Beach.
You can make,
if you have some cash,
an unbelievable deal.
From the mid-to late '90s
onward,
you have this huge rise
in housing prices.
People said, "Well,
I can take out a loan
against my home."
"I could use my home
as collateral,"
or, "I can refinance my home."
And that kept the middle class
going.
Homes were like piggy banks.
Americans have been using
their home as an ATM,
cashing out more than
$500 billion in home equity
from 2001 to 2005 to cover
expenses like health costs,
student debt, repairs,
and credit cards.
We had a debt bubble
prompted by middle-class America
trying to maintain
its living standard
in the face of stagnant wages.
We're seeing more clients
every day that,
very sadly, they've gotten
into a debt hole
that is very difficult
to dig out of.
But there's a limit
to how far you can do that.
You know,
that was a speculative bubble,
and it burst in 2008.
We know what happened.
And so all of the coping
mechanisms
that the middle class has used
to avoid the inevitable reality
that their wages
have gone nowhere for 30 years,
adjusted for inflation,
are now exhausted.
share in the economic gains,
you get into this downward
vicious cycle.
The problem is,
for the last three decades,
nothing
has fundamentally changed
in terms of inequality.
And it wasn't until
the Clinton administration
that there was an opportunity
to reverse all of this.
And that was what was
so damn frustrating.
The Senate, I believe,
is on the verge of passing
the jobs program.
Things are going well.
I mean,
we had budget surpluses.
We might have been able
to take those surpluses
and invest them in education
and job training,
change the structure,
ultimately, of the economy.
But there wasn't
the political will to do that.
Before I leave,
I also want to say
a special word of thanks
to my longtime friend
Secretary Reich,
who's carried on this fight
for the minimum wage.
This was an especially sweet day
for him as well,
and I thank him for his efforts.
I should say something
just so it's not misunderstood.
You know,
Bill Clinton did preside
over one of the best economies
we've had in this country
in living memory.
The wages
of most people went up.
Poverty actually declined.
But we didn't do enough.
We did really alter
the underlying trend.
I became a true pain in the ass.
I mean, looking back on it,
I'm embarrassed.
In meetings,
you know, inequality,
and, "Are we looking
at the distributional impacts
of this policy or that policy?"
I mean, I became predictable.
I'm surprised Bill Clinton
kept me around.
I did want to bring you
up to date
on a couple of matters.
First of all,
the president was reelected.
The second
is that I'm going home.
I am so glad you did not clap.
In the end, I left.
Partly, I was frustrated.
Partly, I just hadn't seen
anything in my family.
I hadn't seen the boys.
I said to Bill Clinton
I had to go home.
I... I do ask myself
whether I've been
a total failure.
I've been saying much
of the same thing for 30 years.
And some of the trends
have grown worse.
Inequality has become worse.
The danger to the economy
and democracy have become worse.
But here's what I tell myself
in my quiet moments.
I say, close to home,
you know, nuts and bolts,
over the kitchen sink,
dining room table,
you know, this is what counts
for most people:
Good jobs, good wages,
a good opportunity
and set of opportunities
for their kids.
Detective Conan O'Brien
and Detective Former Secretary
I am a cockeyed optimist.
I ask you,
do I look like big government?
I wouldn't have spent
so much of my adult life
banging my head against the wall
if I didn't think
that ultimately
it would pay off
No!
That's why I teach.
Now, people who are worried
about widening inequality
are also worried
about something else.
It's not upward mobility.
It's not even trust.
They are worried about
the undermining of democracy...
when so many resources,
so much money, so much wealth,
so much income
accumulates at the very top,
that with money
comes the capacity
to control politics.
There's nothing sinister
the way it starts.
Usually they bring in somebody
you haven't seen
for a few years.
You know,
they're paying them 10 grand.
Might be the best man
in your wedding
or a guy
You say, "Eddie, hell,
I haven't seen you..."
And then they say,
"Now, I'd like to turn it over
to old Freckles here..."
And then they give you
the whole load.
But money...
I mean, do the lobbyists come in
and obviously
"We can help you win
your next election
if you cooperate with us"?
There's a guy in every office
to say, "So-and-so
wants to see you.
"He's from the American
Shoe Leather Company.
"They have maxed out,"
meaning they gave you
the maximum in your primary
when you first started.
"They gave you the maximum
in every general.
and they were there for you
at every point."
And what for?
Access.
This is actually
where there is blame,
and I think the blame
is justifiable.
It's not that people are rich.
It's that they abuse
their wealth
by lobbying for bailouts
and subsidies and taxes
that are going to entrench
their wealth.
That's the reason why the rules
have changed so dramatically.
Look at history.
Inequality and top tax rates
have had
an inverse relationship.
When inequality was lowest,
top tax rates were higher.
When inequality was highest,
tax rates on the wealthy
went down.
Under Dwight D. Eisenhower...
you know, he was a Republican;
Nobody dared call him
a socialist...
the top marginal tax rate
was 91%.
I mean, even when you consider
all deductions
and all tax credits,
they were still paying
way over 50%.
I, John Fitzgerald Kennedy,
do solemnly swear...
I will faithfully execute...
The office of president
of the United States...
So help me, God.
Taxes on the top
until Reagan dropped
those taxes on the top.
Read my lips.
No new taxes.
I, William Jefferson Clinton...
Do solemnly swear...
do solemnly swear...
In fact, most of the very rich
in this country
don't even pay close to that
because most of their income
is in the form
of capital gains,
which is now taxed at 15%.
payroll taxes plus income tax,
mine came to 17.7%.
The average for the office
was 32.9%.
There wasn't anybody
in the office,
from the receptionist on,
Translation
Translate and read this script in other languages:
Select another language:
- - Select -
- 简体中文 (Chinese - Simplified)
- 繁體中文 (Chinese - Traditional)
- Español (Spanish)
- Esperanto (Esperanto)
- 日本語 (Japanese)
- Português (Portuguese)
- Deutsch (German)
- العربية (Arabic)
- Français (French)
- Русский (Russian)
- ಕನ್ನಡ (Kannada)
- 한국어 (Korean)
- עברית (Hebrew)
- Gaeilge (Irish)
- Українська (Ukrainian)
- اردو (Urdu)
- Magyar (Hungarian)
- मानक हिन्दी (Hindi)
- Indonesia (Indonesian)
- Italiano (Italian)
- தமிழ் (Tamil)
- Türkçe (Turkish)
- తెలుగు (Telugu)
- ภาษาไทย (Thai)
- Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
- Čeština (Czech)
- Polski (Polish)
- Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
- Românește (Romanian)
- Nederlands (Dutch)
- Ελληνικά (Greek)
- Latinum (Latin)
- Svenska (Swedish)
- Dansk (Danish)
- Suomi (Finnish)
- فارسی (Persian)
- ייִדיש (Yiddish)
- հայերեն (Armenian)
- Norsk (Norwegian)
- English (English)
Citation
Use the citation below to add this screenplay to your bibliography:
Style:MLAChicagoAPA
"Inequality for All" Scripts.com. STANDS4 LLC, 2024. Web. 22 Nov. 2024. <https://www.scripts.com/script/inequality_for_all_10812>.
Discuss this script with the community:
Report Comment
We're doing our best to make sure our content is useful, accurate and safe.
If by any chance you spot an inappropriate comment while navigating through our website please use this form to let us know, and we'll take care of it shortly.
Attachment
You need to be logged in to favorite.
Log In