Stock Ideas arrow Stock Ideas arrow Investors Daily Edge arrow What Hillary Will Do to Our Economy? Clintonomics 101
Rating
Click for Help

Market Watch

Is it possible to give big banks the benefit of the doubt on maybe not deliberately deepening and extending the credit mess we’re in? No way. Good business is one thing. But selling securities that have already gone bad and knowing about it beforehand is quite another.
More...
 

Login Form






Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
What Hillary Will Do to Our Economy? Clintonomics 101
User Rating: / 0
PoorBest 
Friday, 01 February 2008
By Charles Delvalle
Dear Reader,
Hillary is taking the U.S. by storm, isn’t she? Everyone knows how I feel about her.  To sum it up, I hate dynasties.  I think it’s stupid that the American public is obsessed enough about just a few families that they are willing to let them control the United States for decades.

But let me get off my soapbox and on to the main topic – Clintonomics 101: a study of how Hillary will impact the economy.


To first determine how bad she can mess things up, let’s first look at some of the big things she wants to accomplish.

  1. Universal healthcare
  2. Middle-class tax cuts
  3. $50 billion strategic energy fund

You better be sure that I have an issue with universal healthcare.  The problem with healthcare is that the people who don’t have it usually choose not to because they can’t afford it.

So in essence, the problem is that people can’t afford healthcare.  So the question should be - how do you make it more affordable?

If she passes universal healthcare, it will add more government spending and bloat to a system that already isn’t working.

Middle-class tax cuts sound OK.  I personally think a lot of higher-income people received tax cuts that they probably shouldn’t have received.  Even Warren Buffet believes that same thing.  But these tax cuts should be offset by spending reductions in order to not add to the U.S. deficit.

In the end, I think eliminating income taxes and replacing them with a production or consumption tax (on non-essential items) would fare better.  At the end of the year, if you earn under the poverty line, you send in a form and get a refund for the consumption tax you paid for.
That way, taxes are based on how much a person spends, not on how much they earn.  If you’re rich, you pay more.  If you’re poor, you get a refund.  It also encourages people in the U.S. to save more.  And you have to admit, not many people here save.  And that means anytime we have an economic slowdown, it’s made worse because people run out of “rainy day” money a lot faster.

Last, there’s the $50 billion strategic energy fund.  I think this is a good idea and wish it would have been implemented a long time ago.  The government should ramp up spending on alternative energies, and they should be looking for a way to get us away from oil as soon as possible.  That means building the infrastructure and helping get the cars out into the public.

How does it get paid for, you might ask?  Well. you can do a few things.  You could reduce military spending (which is freaking massive!), you could eliminate certain tax breaks for oil companies, and a few other things, too.

Right now, the government is looking to give away $150 billion.  Why?  So people can spend it on iPods and plasma TVs.  Instead, why not put that $150 billion into alternative energies?  That would increase jobs in the industries of the future (which are higher paying).  Plus, it helps us reduce our trade deficit (by importing less oil), keep more jobs here, and gets us away from relying on the Middle East.

So what do I think of Hillary’s plans?  I really don’t like her universal healthcare plan.  The others are OK.  But as they say, “the devil’s in the details.”

Just realize that Hillary is big on domestic government spending.  She’s practically a socialist in disguise.  But increasing spending will be hard when the country is entering a recession.  And it’s even harder when she has to spend billions in Iraq.

What Caused the Housing Bust

What happened (and what is still happening) is simply leverage in reverse, or what people used to call a "run on the bank." But... I think a great more detail would be helpful for you to...
+ Full Story

The Securities and Exchange Commission on naked short selling

Rick PendergraftBack on June 25, my colleague Rusty McDougal wrote an article about naked short selling and in particular, how it was affecting the junior exploration stocks.  Keep in mind that...
+ Full Story



Plus, the solution to economic problems is rarely in the government’s hands.  What the government should do is help bring about innovation and change.  Not give handouts because people bought a new kitchen at Home Depot when they should have been saving up for a rainy day.

Next week, I’ll cover Mitt Romney and see how he fares.

Oh, and if you have any questions you want me to cover on what they plan on doing to our economy, just shoot over an e-mail to This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it and I’ll be glad to include it in next week’s article.

To your success,

Charles
  • We endeavor to decipher analysis of this Teaser/News Letter to distinguish the thoughts of Authors/Editors.

  • Please post your Review/Comments, your rating helps other users gauge the value of an article ...

  • Was this service a Ripoff ? Click Here To Post Your Ripoff Story !


Bookmark and Share




RSS comments

Write review Your rating helps people guage value of an article
Name:
E-mail
BBCode:Web AddressEmail AddressBold TextItalic TextUnderlined TextQuoteCodeOpen ListList ItemClose List
Review:

I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments
Sorry but! We have to make sure that you are not a bot Please solve this simple math before you submit:
 K          MA5      
FA     A      X   23R
 I    A3X   T4F      
 6     7    A     TQF
SQU         P3T      

 
< Prev   Next >