I think there’s a correlation between the increase in government and the relative wealth of the top 1% in the video. If I recall correctly, they took in only 9% of income in 1976 but now earn 25% of all income.
That part got my attention, too. I was wondering if there is something that can be pointed to in the years from Jimmuh Cartah forward that give fuel to correlating government growth with a smaller percentage doing very well.
It seems that the morte the government gives away the quicker it flows through the hands of the non productive class and back to the top 1%.
I remember a thread here about reparations a couple of years ago and one person said that the biggest sponsors of the idea would probably be corporations and guys like Warren Buffett who know that if the government gave a windfall payment to every black person 90% of it would be spent in months. The example commented on here is to look at NBA players who make uncountable millions and end up broke within years of not playing any longer.
I would agree that this correlation is one of the most important points of the video.
That top 1% funds and owns both political parties, and controls the messaging that keeps the other 99% marching to their assigned drumbeats.
The only group breaking their assigned cadence is the TEA Party with the message: "Cut the taxes; cut the spending; cut the size of government."