Hillary Clinton Twists The Knife Analysis

This week the reading by Frank in the Inequality Reader caught my attention. It talked about how the current tax system in the US is not conducive to helping society. It also mentions how an increase in taxes for the top earners would help not only the poor but also the rich. He also includes how the wealthy “have been made worse off, on balance, by recent tax cuts” (Frank 732). This reading made me think of the current GOP tax plan being signed and debated in congress.

The debates on tax cuts are making their way to headlines of every radio station, newspaper, and television station in America. Today, tax cuts would only benefit the wealthy and wouldn’t really benefit the lower class. “The administration and it’s congressional alleys are proposing to sharply reduce taxation of the business income primarily benefiting

As most people should KNOW that if you focus on getting more money from the rich, you’re losing jobs. Because, in order for there to be jobs you’re going to need money, and if you keep taking larger amounts from these successful companies; the amount of income the worker gets is reduced or they get fired because there just isn’t enough money to keep them working. Hillary Clinton thinks the American people should be taxed more in order for her “plan” to work. Taxes is what her plan consists on, so obviously she wants to raise taxes but as is the average American pays over $10,000-$20,000 in

The nation has been evenly divided between Donald Trump, who is calling for dictatorial control of the country with massive tax breaks to the top 1%, and Hillary Clinton, who is calling for tax breaks for the middle class.

Fox News: Other than the fact that the new tax plan is biased, the amount of changes specified alone generate a significant number of opposers.The GOP tend to make it seem like their tax package will be change that’s beneficial for every American, however, they always make decisions that contradict their opposing side (Democrats). Fox discusses how the Republicans avoid mentioning the costs of creating new tax reforms similar to how they promised to make insurance coverage the same as Obamacare now. In all honesty, after this article referred to Obamacare, the rest of the “information” seems like fluff. I attempted at reading the paragraphs that were oddly formed, but in my eyes they had no correlation to the tax reform/ Obamacare. I recall one piece that discussed how Trump didn’t remember a meeting he had with his former foreign policy advisor that was from his campaign, and as I read I thought to myself, “How does this relate to the tax cuts?”

With the presidential elections coming up, different tax policies are being debated between the candidates. Whether it is proposed by a Democratic or a Republican presidential candidate, there have been many possible solutions presented on how to reform the current tax code. Focusing specifically on four candidates, two from the Democratic Party, and two from the Republican Party, I will compare and contrast their respective tax proposals. While the Democratic candidates generally agree with President Obama’s current tax code, all four candidates are looking to reform it in some way in order to, in their own eyes, better the current tax code affecting today’s citizens.

Clinton, on the other hand, wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and lower taxes on companies that hire more people. She would keep the taxes the same, but add an additional bracket for the highest earners. Clinton has proposed altering the medium-term and long-term capital gain tax benefits for people with at least 5 million dollars in earned income. Investors wouldn 't see any reduction in long-term capital gains taxes until they hold their investment for at least two years, and they wouldn 't see the current 20% rate unless they were to hold investments for six or more years. She is also taking aim at estate tax reform and social security payroll tax. Clinton 's plan would add 1.1 trillion in revenue over the next 10 years (Sahadi)

Unlike her political opponent Senator Bernie Sanders, her plan makes the most logical sense to Americans simply because there will be a way repay and eliminate debt, while Sanders plan sounds promising, but someone will eventually have to pick up the

Taxation, government expenditures, management of the national debt, and tax expenditures (tax breaks) were all expounded by Trump in Dave Shiflett’s (2000) book, Trump: The America we Deserve.” Trump is quoted:

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have stated that they have many different views on nearly everything I chose to study their plans for taxes and the effects their campaign promises will have on small businesses. This is important to me as a small business owner and I feel that their views on part of the aspects do not differ as significantly as they claim, but some aspects do differ drastically.

She claims that raising taxes on the wealthy is counterproductive; the wealthy create jobs and should be encouraged to expand. However, as income has progressively grown higher for the wealthy in the United States over the last forty years, the super wealthy, that have the power to create jobs within the economy, trend on supplying low income jobs versus middle income jobs. Looking at the seven bracket income tax rates of 2017, jobs earning $91,000 to $191,650 would be considered medium income, but according to the 2016 US Census, the average medium income is $59,000. As far as the wealthy literally creating jobs, Stephen King states that he has a total payroll of about 60 people, mostly working for his two radio stations he owns in Maine (Daily Beast). The July 2011 Reason Foundation study, “Unmasking the Mortgage Interest Deduction,” found the annual average tax saving of the mortgage deduction for a taxpayer making $50,000 to $75,000 was $179, and only about one-third in this group claim the deduction. At the upper income level, however, homeowners with incomes exceeding $200,000 get an annual tax benefit of more than $2,200, and almost three-quarters claim the deduction. On top of this, the wealthy claim deductions on their million dollar second homes in Colorado and their yachts parked in the marina’s along Long Island. I do believe Borowski is correct that it would be anti capitalistic to

Donald Trump’s policies on taxes are geared towards helping the economy recovering and the establishment of more jobs. Trump wishes to cut down the income so it no longer negatively effects the middle

Beginning with the Democrats, Hillary Clinton’s tax policy is “Relief for the Middle Class and an Environment for Long Term Growth.” Per the article, her reforms include unspecified cuts for the middle class and small businesses that share profits with employees. She also aims to raise taxes on medium-term capital gains, which is a new category that would increase the capital gains rate for high-income taxpayers, on investments held from one to six years, from a flat 20 percent to a range of 24 to 36 percent. As a result, higher taxes would be imposed on the wealthy and would discourage those who short-term buy and sell assets (Witte, 2016).

This may sound like a tax plan that will relieve the financial burden on lower-income taxpayers, directly benefiting the poor, but in actuality, cutting taxes for all in a regressive manner gives substantially more money to the wealthiest taxpayers and a very small amount to lower income taxpayers. According to his plan, a typical American family of four will be able to keep at least $1, 600 more of

Trump as a presidential candidate had expressed his views on how to grow the US economy. Obviously, US economy had been growing, albeit, anemically. But has president he will have the economic wind at his back—last quarter economic growth was a robust 3.6 percent. So one has to assume that by growth they mean faster rate of growth than the country is currently experiencing: 1.2 growth rate of GDP (it averaged about 2.5 percent in 2015), with unemployment below 5 percent. What they had in mind was an accelerated rate of growth. Part of Donald Trump‘s plan includes reducing tax brackets from the current seven to three with rates of 12, 25, and 33 percent. He expects a 4 percent GDP growth, which is not beyond the ability of the US economy to achieve. Sen. Hillary Clinton wants a faster rate of