Former first daughter Chelsea Clinton reportedly has a net worth of about $15 million even though she has insisted that she doesn’t care about money.
In a recent interview with Fast Company, Chelsea Clinton said in part, “It is frustrating, because who wants to grow up and follow their parents? I’ve tried really hard to care about things that were very different from my parents. I was curious if I could care about [money] on some fundamental level, and I couldn’t. That wasn’t the metric of success that I wanted in my life…”
These comments came seemingly at an inopportune time, just after her mom, presumed Democrat presidential candidate and income inequality foe Hillary Clinton, stirred things up during her unexpectedly contentious Hard Choices book tour by claiming that she and her husband were “dead broke” when they left the White House, and that they are not truly well off.
Bill and Hillary Clinton are reportedly now worth somewhere in the range of $100 million to $200 million. Mrs. Clinton makes about $200,000 a pop for speeches primarily in front of corporate one-percenters, and her husband, the former president, makes even more for his group presentations. Along with huge book advances from publishers, making big bucks on the speaking circuit evidently has turned out to not be one of those hard choices.
Over in England, wealthy politicians and their connected relatives and friends of this ilk are often referred to as “champagne socialists.” On this side of the Atlantic, the term “limousine liberals” tends to apply.
UNLV students are also up in arms about an upcoming speech at their school in which Mrs. Clinton, the former Secretary of State, stands to collect a $225,000 speaking fee.
The Clintons have reportedly set up a trust to minimize their IRS liability under the estate (a.k.a. death) tax, with the presumed beneficiary being Chelsea Clinton and her family.
As The Inquisitr previously reported, Chelsea Clinton reportedly earns about $1 million a year, which includes a hefty paycheck from what might amount to a no-show job with NBC News, thereby raising implications of corporate welfare.
After working at a Wall Street hedge fund, Chelsea Clinton, 34, apparently followed her dream and became an executive at the Clinton Foundation, the glitzy philanthropic organization coincidentally founded by her parents.
Commenting on Chelsea Clinton’s wealth, the New York Post opined that she is in the running for a mythical “most tactless human” award for going on about her family’s “obsession” with money because…
“The website Celebrity Net Worth pegs Chelsea’s personal fortune at $15 million, with most of her dough earned as a consultant at McKinsey & Co. and by working for Avenue Capital Investment Group. The site estimates [husband Marc] Mezvinsky, 36, is also worth $15 million, which he made as an investment banker at Goldman Sachs and while working at the hedge fund 3G Capital and at a hedge fund he co-founded in 2011… Chelsea Clinton seems to have learned about money from someone who treats it as a passion: her mother.”
There have been some hints that Chelsea Clinton might pursue a career in politics down the road. If she does seek elective office someday, critics would probably say that she appears to be yet another candidate from the elite strata of society who never had a real (or as they say in the U.K, “proper”) job.
About the lavish lifestyle of the Clinton family, the New York Post separately claimed that “The Dems are a coalition of ultra-rich cultural-elite donors on the one hand and government employees and their clients on the other… Yet even for Democrats, the Clintons got rich in an exotic way. They accumulated something like $100 million not by building a business or inventing something or even writing some hit songs. Their entire fortune came from political celebrity. (Their daughter has even accumulated $15 million by being the offspring of political celebrities. Or did you think NBC News paid her $600,000 a year because of her obvious broadcasting ability?)… Swanning around the world staying in five-star hotels, reading speeches drafted by someone else and signing your name to books written by someone else is not exactly quarry labor.”
About Chelsea Clinton claiming to be unconcerned about financial gain, National Review perhaps harshly observed, “Of course Chelsea Clinton does not have the sense or the good taste to be embarrassed when talking about her blasé attitude toward money: Money is invisible to her for the same reason that water is invisible to a fish — she’d notice it if it weren’t there, and flap like a desperate landed mackerel until she’d secured her next big payday.”
Is it easier to not care about money as a metric of success, as Chelsea Clinton puts it, when you are already rich with an estimated net worth of $15 million and famous, politically connected parents?