g********2
发帖数: 6571 | 1 Stephen Moore : Hillary’s Economic Plan Would Lead America OFF A CLIFF
By Stephen Moore
One of the dumbest statements in modern times was Speaker of the House Nancy
Pelosi’s declaration that “the best way to stimulate the economy” is
through food stamps and unemployment insurance.
This economic mumbo jumbo defies basic common sense and helps explain why we
still have more than 40 million Americans on food stamps — evidently, the
more that get free food, the more prosperous we become. This is the crux of
the continuing curse of Keynesian economics, which says that the more the
government spends, the more the economy grows. A dollar of government
spending leads to as much as two dollars of additional economic output,
according to Professor Pelosi.
Hillary Clinton is apparently one of Mrs. Pelosi’s A students. The entire
Clinton recovery agenda is to spend $1 trillion more on government public
works programs, free day care and college education, and expanded
entitlements. She would raise investment and personal income tax rates (paid
by many small businesses) to finance all of this.
Hillary has been parading around a study by economist Mark Zandi of Moodys,
which claims that this fairy dust will mean happy days are here again. He
claims millions of new jobs and billions in added output. But Mr. Zandi has
been one of the wrongest economists in America for the past decade. It was
Mr. Zandi who claimed massive job gains and GDP growth from the Obama
stimulus plan with food stamps and other giveaways.
Oops. Instead we got what The Wall Street Journal recently disparaged as “
the weakest recovery since the 1940s” with stagnant wages.
Meanwhile the Donald Trump economic plan is based on the idea that easing
the burden of taxes and regulations on businesses and workers will kick
start faster growth and bring high-paying manufacturing jobs back to America
. (We are still one million manufacturing jobs shy of where we were in 2007).
Two new studies released in recent days verify that Mr. Trump’s tax plan
will create millions more jobs and raise wages for American workers, while
the Hillary Clinton tax and spend plan would shrink output and possibly
throw the U.S. economy into another painful recession.
A just-released study prepared by the respected Beacon Hill Institute for
the Dallas-based National Center for Policy Analysis finds that Hillary’s
tax plan “would fund tens of thousands of government jobs at the cost of
five times as many private sector jobs, while lowering personal income, GDP
and business investment.” Business investment is already a major weak spot
of the economy.
The study finds that the Clinton tax hikes would crush new investment and
shrink GDP.
According to David Tuerck, the senior economist at Beacon Hill, “in the
first year, real GDP would be more than half a percent less than under the
Congressional Budget Office’s current baseline estimate, and almost 1
percent less in 2026.”
Given that the economy has only been growing at 1.2 percent over the past
nine months, the Hillary tax and spend plan could plunge the U.S. economy
into another deep recession if her tax hikes take effect. Over time the
taxes and debt to pay for the government spending would mean five private
sector jobs lost for every government job created. “What we have here is a
plan to destroy hundreds of thousands of private sector jobs just to pad
government payrolls,” Mr. Tuerck concludes, “while, in the process, doing
almost nothing to improve tax fairness.”
Then there is economist Larry Kotlikoff of Boston University, who has
modeled the impact of the Trump plan to cut the U.S. business tax rate to 15
percent from as high as 35 percent today.
According to Mr. Kotlikoff, by reducing this tax rate on domestic production
of goods and services, by 2020 the U.S. economy would be $1.34 trillion
larger than otherwise. Wages would rise by 6 to 7 percent above the baseline
.
I have known Professor Kotlikoff for years. He is a life long Democrat and
tells me he is not even a Trump supporter. But he says Mr. Trump’s plan is
far superior to Mrs. Clinton‘s. “Moving from our 35 percent corporate tax
rate to Trump’s proposed 15 percent rate would,” he concludes, “produce a
huge increase in capital, much of it coming from abroad.”
Who benefits the most from the Trump tax cut? Mr. Kotlikoff concludes: “
This kind of reform has the potential to raise the income of the typical
worker by as much as $4,000 per year within the next four years.”
That’s at least $4,000 more added income than middle class workers got
after eight years of Obama policies.
Hillary Clinton’s campaign theme is that Donald Trump is “too risky” to
put in the White House. But the biggest risk to America’s financially-
stressed middle class is another gut-wrenching recession. It’s fairly
simple. If these new studies are right, Hillary’s tax and spend economic
plan may well lead us over that cliff.
• Stephen Moore is an economic consultant with Freedom Works and a
senior economic consultant with the Trump campaign.
H/T – Washington Times
http://truthfeed.com/stephen-moore-hillarys-economic-plan-would-lead-america-off-a-cliff/20180/ | T*********I
发帖数: 10729 | | g********2
发帖数: 6571 | | s***d
发帖数: 15421 | | r***i
发帖数: 9780 | 5 可不光是经济跳崖
引入几百万穆斯林，社会治安，法治，什么都跳崖 | t*******d
发帖数: 12895 | 6 正想说
【在 r***i 的大作中提到】
: 可不光是经济跳崖
: 引入几百万穆斯林，社会治安，法治，什么都跳崖
| g********2
发帖数: 6571 | 7 记得甜妈最关心经济问题，说别的方面都相通了，都支持川普，就是经济方面，觉得他
不靠谱。
不知道专家说的话甜妈信不信？ | h*******u
发帖数: 15326 | 8 确实奇怪
【在 s***d 的大作中提到】
: 希拉里没给钱了? 经济学人可是反川先锋.
| x****d
发帖数: 2239 | 9 No, No.
This is NOT from The Economist magazine. The author is an economist.
【在 s***d 的大作中提到】
: 希拉里没给钱了? 经济学人可是反川先锋.
|
|
