They've demonized "income redistribution" like they have with so many...

words.

Dumb America only hears "I can win the lottery, too" when income is redistributed to the wealthy, and "socialism" and "class warfare" when money goes the other direction.

For some reason, Dems let them win all the marketing wars. Remember when Dems were too afraid to say "Liberal"?

Great find, kpete, thanks!

nice post bvar!

Bravo! That's exactly what's been taking place for 30 years

Finally letting us know what her platform will look like...

"Striking a soothing note on the global financial crisis, she told the audience, in effect: We all got into this mess together, and we’re all going to have to work together to get out of it. What the bankers heard her to say was just what they would hope for from a prospective presidential candidate: Beating up the finance industry isn’t going to improve the economy—it needs to stop. And indeed Goldman’s Jim O’Neill, the laconic Brit who heads the bank’s asset management division, introduced Clinton by saying how courageous she was for speaking at the bank. (Brave, perhaps, but also well-compensated: Clinton’s minimum fee for paid remarks is $200,000)."

What would Hillary do...?

"My view, and the view of many, is that trade agreements are more of a foreign policy tool than an economic policy tool. Presidents and their State Departments want alliances with countries, and use trade agreements as part of the diplomacy, tying us together. The problem is that we lose so many industries as we “bribe” those countries by way of giving them access to our domestic market without receiving similar volumes of foreign sales.

<snip>

Thus… Clinton’s and Obama’s strategy is fatally flawed, because (1) the TPP will likely worsen our trade deficit or at least it won’t help and (2) the fact of our trade deficit means we can’t be a substantial foreign investor (because we are a net recipient of foreign investment)."

http://economyincrisis.org/content/hillary-clinton-wants-u-s-investment-in-asia