>If I story $5mm under my mattress, I have wealth without generating income.

This isn’t true. The $5mm is merely representational. The social dynamics that maintain it’s exchange value, i.e. security, is circumstantial. The security is exercised by way of capital.

>personal property is almost by definition a form of wealth which does not produce income/accumulate value.

This is ahistorical. In a capitalist society, personal property is a means to produce value all the same. Capitalism comprises relational circumstances that deem your toothbrush, comb, computer, school supplies, and your quiet home all as means to produce value.

The Democratic Party is a mess of conflicting patronage. Sadly, there is still a voting constituency who does not think the wealthy should control every aspect of the lives of the working poor.

It’s a bargaining device.

A very poor one given how many voters who actually vote (older, landowners, wealthier, etc.) are perfectly happy with the status quo.

Absolutely. They will pass the bill and stop there. Very important to hold the line on this.

I disagree. The more you put into a single bill, the more natural enemies of that legislation you create. Pass what you can piece by piece. Hold the line, sure, by not letting up on the pressure after the first . . . and second . . . and third . . . bill is passed, etc.. Politicians only give up and rest on their laurels when the public loses interest.

It’s not just about expectations of yourself. It might even be more about others’ expectations of you.

When society says your white privilege means you have no excuse for failure, that is a hard dead end.

Does society say that? I've never come across a description of white privilege that didn't compare it to playing your life on easy mode. Sure, your life might be tough but it's less tough than it would be if you in the exact same situation and not white.

However you try to spin it, your point is that it is their own fault.

Erm, no. Fault doesn't come into it.