Gotta love the subtitle of the article: "Chelsea Clinton is...finally carving out her own identity - by joining the family business".

After getting various high-paying gigs through Mommy's and Daddy's influence, she discovers that even that is too much trouble. So better to go back to the next, where Mommy and Daddy will pay her directly, in order to do nothing.

She's not alone in this. She and all the other progenty of the political elite have no idea what "real life" is like. They would benefit from a few years living like the rest of us, i.e., having to work in order to put food on the table.

When you put it like that a_random_guy, all I can think of is that it could be much worse.

Let her prosper at the Clinton Foundation... And stay there.

(Though I would place bets on the inevitable Clinton/Obama Bush/Bush ticket of 2036.)

No hope for change! Relive the nightmare!

the inevitable Clinton/Obama Bush/Bush ticket of 2036.

Come on, lets go all in with Clinton/Bush Obama/Bush ticket.

Oh, so she's working for the family's foundation? the one with a current endowment north of $1 billion? that foundation?

I'm sure she'll draw a nice monthly stipend. And because of that, she'll be invited to join boards of directors for large corporations, and draw more nice stipends for relatively little work.

Nice gig, if you can get it. Hey, Chelsea, throw me $10,000/month and I can consult you on how to setup and run a secure mail server...

She has all of her mama's charm and her daddy's good sense. Told bad it's not the other way around.

She and all the other progenty of the political elite have no idea what "real life" is like. They would benefit from a few years living like the rest of us, i.e., having to work in order to put food on the table.

Do you really care about the development of her character, or is this just a case of misery wanting company?

I say more power to her.

I think it would be great if more people on this earth could spend their time doing things they want to do and less time having to do things they hate because they have to worry about money in order to eat.

Most of the time, when people tell me work will "build my character," it's been because they wanted me to do their work for them.

@Pirate Jo: That's a fair question. I confess I would like to see a little more suffering in certain groups. As you say, it's character-building.

I'll even agree with you that it would be nice if everyone had the freedom to do whatever they wanted, rather than having to worry about paying the rent and putting food on the table. That's not reality, but sure, it would be nice.

However, there is a real, practical problem. In 10 or 20 years or so, Chelsea and her colleagues will hold seats in Congress, will be on the boards of major corporations, will - in fact, if not in name - be running the country. Hereditary power. That's not how it's supposed to be, but that's how it is.

Yet she and her colleagues have absolutely no idea what life is like outside their bubble. How the people affected by their decisions live, work and play.

Which might just explain why so many well-intentioned programs go awry. Obamacare - health care for all! Oh dear, Obamacare drove the entire hospitality industry to turned their workers part-time. They can't pay their rent? Oh well, say the elite, we meant well...

So, back to you question: Do I care about Chelsea's character? I wouldn't, if it didn't have a direct impact on the rest of us. But it does. A little suffering on her part would do the rest of us a world of good.

Parents assume because they live in a rarefied air their child has the same up from the boot straps work ethic and skill. Puleeze.
Thats okay no checks or balances and people like this do end up broke and homeless because they do not have real life coping behaviors. Thats why the parents hog up the money they know what a fluke it can be and how quickly the rug of security can be pulled out from under someone. Here are some nice cut and paste examples:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2829052/Late-billionaire-s-trustees-allowed-drain-children-s-210-million-trust-fund-prop-struggling-Pittsburgh-newspaper-10-years.html

http://www.earlytorise.com/how-the-worlds-richest-family-went-broke/

Ah crony capitalism, $1 billion slush fund so that's what Hillary was doing as Secretary of State.

I keep my attention focused on my own life. I've made choices so that I don't have to spend as much time worrying about putting food on the table and can spend more time doing the things I enjoy. Maybe it will be 100% of my time someday, I don't know - for now it's half.

I wouldn't want to live under my parents' thumb, but maybe Chelsea's parents don't bust her chops too much. If she's able to skip the kind of demoralizing drudgery that makes the rest of us want to tear our hair out, I'm envious but don't wish suffering on her.

I give the crony capitalists less power over me by having zero debt, by working as little as possible so that my taxes are the bare minimum they can be, and by not having kids for them to use as debt serfs, soldiers, or tax donkeys.

Jo,

As long as she doesn't go into public service more power to her. I could care less that she has a sweetheart deal. But articles like this do a public service keeping her out of elected positions where her ignorance and lack of character will hurt the rest of us.

I'd like to see her join Gordon Ramsay for Chelsea Hell's Kitchen.

"Which might just explain why so many well-intentioned programs go awry. Obamacare - health care for all! Oh dear, Obamacare drove the entire hospitality industry to turned their workers part-time. They can't pay their rent? Oh well, say the elite, we meant well..."

And there's the actual problem. Chelsea is simply the easiest to see it in because we all know she isn't worth the 600k she's being paid. Obama wasn't ready to be President. Yes, he had lofty ideas that looked good on paper, but experience would have tempered that with pragmatism. Instead, what we got was a person elected solely on two characteristics: 1) he was black [used to assuage the guilt of the majority of white liberals], and 2) he's likable. That's it.

A more experienced person would have recognized that you don't change the healthcare system of a nation of 330 million people overnight, no matter "if the Scandinavians can do it" (that has always been a small minded argument anyway). An experienced person would have take small, sound steps.

Part of being a leader is NOT giving everyone what they want all the time, it's making steady progress towards what the need (an example would have been outlawing lifetime caps, or preventing discrimination based on pre-existing conditions; observing the marketplace; then acting accordingly). We all can see Chealsea isn't 600k worth being a leader, now if we all could just make a slightly more nuanced decision with our elected officials, we might be getting somewhere