1. Peter Schiff is far more objective than some give him credit for. He's an analyst. The 1% claim is meant to attract people to him where he can represent the 1% in debate. It makes him a target.
2. By representing the 1% in debate, he hopes to turn the discussion away from "tax the rich" to "reduce spending and power of government." Taxing the rich doesn't work, and you saw the light bulb moment when the mortgage lady realized that if they tax him, he'll quit, and 150 more people will be out of work, and why should he work if he can't keep what he earns?
The only thing wrong with this clip is that it is only a part of the line of reasoning that must be followed in order to realize that government spending and regulation is the problem, not private wealth.
What do you think? http://consequeries.com/