Hillary’s economy–the only thing shovel ready are the taxes

Hillary’s economy–the only thing shovel ready are the taxes—47h.,b43

At a Kentucky rally in May Hillary Clinton announced . she would put her husband in charge of revitalizing the economy. ’cause you know he knows how to do it. And especially in places like coal country and inner cities and other pans of the country that have really been left: BY WHOM?

The economy in the 1990s was far more robust than the economy President Obama has presided over. Bill Clinton acted to spur private investment and growth. He provided regulatory relief, approved spending cuts to capital gains, and endorsed a balanced budget. The economy grew and flourished. But the notion of Bill Clinton as economic czar in his wife’s administration lasted about one day. In place of his policies, Hillary Clinton has embraced the exact opposite. She stresses income redistribution. Economic growth, a bipartisan isan goal of presidents for decades. has been abandoned.

Rather than cut regulations, she wants more of them. Government spending would skyrocket under her, especially to pay for roads and bridges. Tax rates would increase, chiefly for those earning more than $250,000 annually. A balanced budget? That’s no one of Hillary Clinton’s goals.

There’s no change in Hillary Clinton’s plan from Obama’s. She would preserve the Obama status quo—that is, the weakest economic recovery since 1949, a mass exodus of workers out of the job market, and a growth rate of less than 3%) year after year.

Her policies are clones of Obama’s. This would all but guarantee slow growth and a weak economy. The strongest recoveries since World War Il-President Kennedy -l960s  and Reagan’s in the 1980s -were based on tax incentives to stimulate private investment. economic growth, and job creation. Clinton’s economic ideas are nothing like these.

The reason is the Democratic party has given up on growth,” says Douglas Hoitz-Eakin former director of the CBO. It’s all redistribution.” Rather than fight this, she has succumbed.

Everything” doesn’t include for private investment,  which have stagnated under Obama. Nor does it include tax cuts for businesses or individuals, which were largely responsible for the booming economies in the 1960s and 1980s.

The platform was promising with its call to “make investments to spur the creation of millions of jobs for our young people.” But the investments consist of “direct federal funding for a range of local programs that will put young people to work and create new career opportunities^;^

“In my first 100 days, we will work  with both parties to pass the biggest investment in new, good-paying jobs since World War II,” she said. “Jobs in war manufacturing, clean energy, technology and innovation, small business. and infrastructure.

“If we invest in it! now”—that”s government investment we’ll not only create jobs today, but lay the foundation for the jobs of the future.” Maybe, but it didn’t work well for Obama, whose famous “stimulus” relied heavily on infrastructure, but didn’t stimulate much. There’s not much help to spur a recovery.” And the long-run payoff for the  economy isn’t great either.

According to Moody’s Analytics, plan  Clinton’s plan would create 10.4 million new jobs over four years. That sounds better than it really is because 6 million of those jobs would not come from infi-astructure but from immigration.

But the most striking feature of Clintonomics—version 2016—is a barrage of tax increases. In Philadelphia she boasted the tax hikes would pay for  “every single one” of the government programs she is proposing. “And here’s be how,” she said. “Wall Street, corporations, and the super-rich are going to Start paying their fair share of taxes.

“Americans for Tax Reform estimates her major tax increases would exceed $1 trillion over 10 years. Moody’s says new taxes would raise $1.45 trillion. Either way, higher taxes that raise the cost of doing business and reduce the money available for private investment are not the best tools for generating growth and jobs.

‘There’s not a single pro-growth or pro-investment plank in the platform, says Steve Moore, who is working on Trump’s plan.

source-weekly std, fred barnes, douglas holtz-eakin,


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s