Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Responds To Ivanka Trump's Theory About Working Americans

Ivanka Trump's labor self-own confused us all.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez arguably has a much more intimate understanding of what it means to 'work for what you get' than Ivanka Trump does. Trump, as heir to a high-profile real estate dynasty, has been appointed to a series of lucrative positions by her father, who is now the President of the United States. Meanwhile, you know Ocasio-Cortez's name because of her underdog grassroots campaign for the U.S. House seat she currently occupies; a campaign she launched while still tending bar because her family needed the extra income.

Despite the obvious experience gap, Ivanka Trump still took it upon herself to critique the Green New Deal outlined by Ocasio-Cortez and Senator Ed Markey, specifically, the part about a living wage jobs guarantee. In a Fox News appearance on Tuesday, the favorite Trump child (allegedly) and former star of a reality TV show called "Born Rich" mused that all the Real Americans she's observed in her travels seem to derive more satisfaction from earned income than they do from hand-outs.

Her words, per Fox:

I don't think most Americans, in their heart, want to be given something. I've spent a lot of time traveling around this country over the last four years. People want to work for what they get. So, I think that this idea of a guaranteed minimum is not something most people want. They want the ability to be able to secure a job. They want the ability to live in a country where there's the potential for upward mobility.

Naturally, Ocasio-Cortez took issue with this blanket statement. "As a person who actually worked for tips & hourly wages in my life, instead of having to learn about it 2nd-hand, I can tell you that most people want to be paid enough to live," Ocasio-Cortez fired back in a tweet. "A living wage isn't a gift, it's a right. Workers are often paid far less than the value they create."

And yeah, just to do my bit with regards to the ratio here, not a single aspect of Trump's professional trajectory can be easily attributed to merit alone. She has always worked for her father: first as a top executive at the Trump Organization, now in an ill-defined role as presidential advisor. She may or may not derive personal profits off some of the policies she's pushed. Sure, she's had her side gigs—recall that fashion label built on that backs of sweatshop workers, and her book about Women Who Work (provided they work in slick corporate jobs)—but her career rests on her family name.

Meanwhile, "potential for upward mobility" rests on strengthened social safety nets that allow low-wage and hourly workers to take time off when they're sick; care for their children; access health services before neglected issues become exorbitantly expensive problems; and earn a higher fee for the work they do. People who make as much as the Trumps do might have to pay their fair share in taxes to make this a reality, but polls consistently suggest that most people support higher taxes for the wealthy and corporations.

You could take Trump's theory as a sign of privilege-fueled oblivion, or as a signal that she may not fully understand how jobs work for regular people—as Ocasio-Cortez put it, "Imagine attacking a Jobs Guarantee by saying 'people prefer to earn money.'"

That's pretty rich stuff, literally.