It official. We have two candidates one of whom will almost certainly occupy the White House for the next four years: it’s The Donald vs. Hillary.
If it is Hillary, what is the Democrat plan for the our lagging economy? Here is the problem: the Democrat Platform is silent on economic growth. Why is that, ask you? Because, answer I, the Obama administration, the legacy adopted by Hillary, has been silent on economic growth for eight years.
[Source: The Late, Great Democratic Party, by Stephen Moore]
Obamanomics has been the most pitiful economic plan since the Great Depression.
We barely have had 2 percent growth under Obama and lately it hasn’t even been that good. We are an economy that is essentially treading water. Yes, we are growing but the standard of living for American workers will not improve with this paltry growth rate. The Democrat party has given up on “growth” to improve the lives of Americans and decided, instead, to apply the time-honored communist credo of “redistribution of wealth.”
My friends, if you’re not “for growth,” then we are unlikely to “see growth.” As Mr. Moore puts it, “if you’re not even trying to get in shape, it’s a good bet you’re not going to shed those extra 16 pounds.”
In Hillary’s speech to the Democrat National Convention she promised us “the biggest investment in new, good-paying jobs since World War II.” That means a government “stimulus program.” You remember the Obama “stimulus program” with all the “shovel ready” projects. He spent $800 billion (but add in the interest payments and it is upwards of $1.2 trillion).
[From the Moore article] Amazingly, the last great growth hawk of the Democratic Party of modern times, John F. Kennedy, ran against Republican Richard Nixon in 1960 on the issue of the “growth deficit.” …JFK said we can “do bettah” and convinced Americans we could see much faster wage gains with greater opportunities. Through tax cuts and free trade, the JFK era sparked growth rates of 4, 5 and even 6 percent in the go-go ’60s until LBJ crashed the economy with New Deal welfare statism.
Now we have this weird austerity-worship that has taken over the party. The rich and businesses are portrayed as scalpers and scoundrels. And employers are exploiters in the “you didn’t build that” mindset. Radical environmentalists, a bedrock of the party, are anti-growth and believe that when people get richer, it’s worse for the planet. (They should go live in India or Mexico City and see how well the environment is doing there.) They ridicule what they call “growth-mania” on the right. Human economic activity, they warn, is causing catastrophic global warming.
Perhaps this explains the litany of economic failures during the Obama years. We have had $8 trillion of new debt; minimum-wage increases; Obamacare; an $800 billion stimulus plan (with “shovel-ready” projects); tax increases on the rich; more than $100 billion in green energy subsidies; auto company and union pension bailouts; re-regulation of the financial industry and banks; and a Federal Reserve that has manufactured near zero short-term interest rates for seven years with up to $4 trillion of bond acquisitions. All of these were designed primarily to redistribute income, so is it a shock that they haven’t produced growth?
The Democrat Party wants you to believe that 2% growth is “the new normal.” So be prepared to work more and get less.
I am prepared to admit that Donald Trump is a poor political candidate. But I believe he can be a good president. Look at the reverse situation. The best political candidate in the last quarter century was Barack Obama and yet he was the worst president in American history. I have learned my lesson and do not plan to cast my vote on mastery of political candidacy. Without question Hillary is a better political candidate than Donald Trump, but I believe that Obama wants her to succeed him because he knows she will take him out of the position of “worst president of all time.”