I hate Trump, I think he's a liar, a fool, and he'll say anything to get elected. The people that vote for him are doing so because they see no other candidate identify with their values. This is a crisis with both parties really, you go extreme or you go home.
I also think this a result of the Republican party splintering into the major groups. The conservatives, and the right, and libertarian. No one believes that the Republican party is upholding its values of limited government and negative rights yet people don't want cuts to 'their' benefits. /boggle
I feel like I'm taking crazy pills, but I'm more likely to vote Trump than Hillary or Bernie. At least with Trump I'm taking a chance to shrink government and at least he's somewhat knowledgeable about the economy.
Not really
" It's interesting how many holes are in his economic plan since he has a degree in Economics from Wharton. You would think he would have a more sophisticated plan.
He plans to eliminate all income tax from about 1/2 the people in the US and then lower/simplify the brackets after that. This would give lower income folks more $$$ and increase consumer spending, especially as the multiplier effect is the strongest for lower income folks who don't save much/any.
He wants to cap all company taxes at 15%, regardless of size. He expects this to bring businesses back to the US from foreign locations. The idea being that 15% is a lower percentage, but if they are in the US at least we can tax them, and we can't tax some at all now as it is, so 15% is better than nothing.
That's very Supply Side economic theory.
He seems to think we have the 'worst' (I assume he means highest) corporate tax rate in the world, but that is misleading. Yes, our top marginal rate is the 3rd highest, but the effective rate is one of the lowest in the Industrialized world. He says he wants to close the loopholes, but lower the overall rate to 15%. Even if that worked, most US corporations are paying around 14% effective tax rate now---so how is that different? (other than putting all the Accountants out of a job).
He wants to have a Tax Holiday of 10% so corporations will repatriate the profits they are hiding overseas. The idea being that a short-term period where taxes are extra low will result in US based multi-national corporations bringing their cash back to the US, paying the low tax, and then using that money to invest in US based jobs. Except we did that once before---in 2004---and none of that happened.
As for Immigration: He talks about the number of illegal immigrants and how they 'take' benefits, but he doesn't talk about the number of jobs they work or the GDP they produce. Many illegal immigrants work low-skill positions, but still product goods/services. They also use their wages to consumer products like any other person. That consumer spending drives GDP as well.
He talks about 11 million jobs opening up for Americans when he deports all the illegals, but he forgets that most Americans don't want those low income jobs. The US economy is almost at full employment (meaning most of the people who want a job have one), so where exactly does he think these 11 million people are going to come from to take these jobs that are currently held by illegal immigrants?
Foreign Trade:
He threatens import tariffs on foreign produced goods, but neglects to remember that other nations will do the same to us----perhaps Wharton doesn't teach the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Bill of 1930? If we put a tax on imports, other nations will tax our exports. Considering US exports have been falling anyway (as our goods are more expensive because of the exchange rate) and having our partners add a tax would kill our exports. That would hurt the very American jobs he claims he's trying to help.
Also, since a lot of our imports are raw materials or unfinished goods, an tax on imports will drive up the cost of raw materials for goods made or finished in the US. Import tariffs drive up the cost of foreign goods to American consumers---in the end, the consumer pays the higher price, either through an already expensive American product or by purchasing a tax-inflated price for a foreign good. Cheap imports help American consumers.
Unemployment---I don't think he even knows how it's calculated, because his own website refers to the 92 million Americans who are 'outside' the work force. It's part of his plan to make companies hire Americans first instead of hiring foreign workers through H1-B visas. He makes it wound like there are 92 million Americans waiting around for a job---when that is ridiculously untrue. That number includes all people in the US who aren't working---not the number who want a job but don't have one. He is counting Not In Labor Force people (retired, SAHP, full-time students, etc) as if they can't get a job because of foreign workers. Blatantly mis-leading.
He also wants to force companies to 'pause' to hire from domestic work force instead of issuing green cards---except he's assuming the current group of immigrants or US citizens has the skill set needed. Our dept hired a new Professor not long ago. This requires a PhD in Economics. At least 75% of the applicants were foreign-born because US students don't get PhD in Economics anymore (mostly because they can't do the math). Who am I supposed to hire if there aren't any Americans?? He seems to think all 'immigrants' have the same job skills and are interchangeable.
He also states that this 'pause' will force companies to hire women and stop the 'Plummeting" female labor force participation rate. Also, complete BS, because the Female Labor Force participation rate has been relatively steady since the 1990's. (LFPR is the percentage of adult women who choose to join the labor force as opposed to being retired or a SAHP. It's different from the unemployment rate). You would think he would know this, but it seems he missed my class on Gender Economics."-quote from economics professor.
