Trump’s Big Economic Policy Address Is Short On Specifics, Other Than Help For Wealthy

Huffington Post:

Trump’s campaign on Monday pulled down his old tax plan from his website, and replaced it with the text of his Detroit speech. The original plan would have capped income taxes at 25 percent and long-term capital gains and dividends at 20 percent, while adding $12 trillion to the national debt.

In its place, Trump offered the same basic ideas, with some slightly shifted details. More details, he said, would be provided “in the coming weeks.”

He also offered some of his usual refrains: Trump lamented that the country had strayed from an “America First” policy; bemoaned that skyscrapers had been built in Beijing and refugees had been accepted into the U.S.; and called the unemployment rate a hoax.

“All of our policies should be geared towards keeping wealth inside the United States,” he said.

Trump is struggling in the polls after spending the last several days insulting the Gold Star family and refusing to endorse prominent Republicans for office.

2 responses to “Trump’s Big Economic Policy Address Is Short On Specifics, Other Than Help For Wealthy

  1. First, let’s all agree the focus should be “America First” and with that said, while the economy hasn’t had the rebound it needed over the last 8 years – that can only be blamed on Hilary Clinton indirectly through her husband and his 1990’s deregulation policies, i.e. Glass-Steagall. If you look closely at the Obama administration it would be impossible for Clinton, Obama and Congress not to recognize the need to reinstate Glass-Steagall and regulate the “unregulated” derivatives that caused TRILLION$ of pension fund dollars to be gambled away and literally wiped out – which is what caused the final demise of Detroit…and most major cities and states. Those cities that have filed bankruptcy had to do so in order to wipe out or reconstruct their pension funds that some idiot politicians allowed them to throw away at Wall Street in “unregulated” financial products with hundreds of pages of risk warnings.
    Was it intentional? Was it for the purpose of union busting? The things (like unions) that protect the middle class have been eroded. Like it or not, unions helped maintain wage increases and helped to keep strong numbers of average Americans proud and united.
    These Presidential candidates think you can’t handle the truth – but what they are actually battling are the facts that millions of Americans (including the families that have already lost their homes and investments in the 2008 disaster) are on the verge of severe haircuts in their “planned” retirement accounts. It’s not a secret Wall Street is rigged – so why would either candidate want to be in bed with the crooks?

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s