"Harris delivered a speech Friday seeking to address the economic concerns of American voters, but her approach drew criticism for lacking substantive plans and relying on populist rhetoric, according to The Washington Post. The editorial board stated, amid continuing frustration over high costs of living, Harris chose to focus on corporate malpractices like price-gouging rather than provide a detailed economic strategy. The editorial board also claimed Harris “squandered the moment on populist gimmicks.”
Here's How Americans View Harris And Trump On The Economy (forbes.com)
. . ."Trump’s economic plan has largely focused on deregulation in the energy and financial industries, touting the much-better inflation during his presidency than Biden’s, and instituting significant tariffs on Chinese goods. The U.S. economy performed very well under both Trump and Biden by most metrics, with historically low unemployment, strong stock market performance and steady economic output growth occurring during both administrations, save for a 2020-21 global blip during the depths of the COVID-19 pandemic (see here for detailed data on how the economy fared under Biden and Trump). The president often has a less direct impact on the U.S. economy than public perception may suggest, considering the difficulty in implementing policies, the global nature of the economy and the fragile nature of the stock market, which ultimately relies on earnings growth for multinational corporations." ...
Kamala Harris’s Economic Plan Will Be a Disaster for Consumers (townhall.com) . . ."Harris has misidentified the disease of which inflation is a symptom. She blames corporate greed as the driver of rising prices — not profligate stimulus; not incontinent monetary policy; not the supply-side chaos caused by Covid-19 and the attendant state-imposed lockdowns; not price-ballooning central planning, such as protectionism and barriers to energy abundance; not anti-innovative boondoggles, such as the Farm Bill.
"The strings connecting high food prices to corporate greed are wild-eyed and largely fictious, economists Ryan Bourne and Bryan Cutsinger write. According to NYU data, the grocery industry average a net profit margin of just 1.18 percent. Bourne and Cutsinger note that policies that attempt to tie inflation to corporate greed “are not only economically destructive, but would have failed to address inflation’s underlying cause — namely, a surge in total spending brought on by excessive monetary and fiscal stimulus.”
"Harris’s policy prescriptions are predictably inapt — or worse. Her campaign says that she will seek to impose price controls on food and groceries and dispatch antitrust officials to harass grocery stores that attempt mergers. These kinds of policies — which, under Biden, have proven useless — have attracted economically muddled politicians for time immemorial. Ham-fisted flailing at “corporate greed” is the last refuge of politicians who want desperately to seem to have command of economic issues about which they are wholly baffled. The twin barrels of anti-corporate populism — price fixing and frivolous antitrust — unfailingly worsen the bad economic conditions that cultivate populism in the first place." . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment