Hillary Clinton Makes Dire Predictions for Economy if Donald Trump Wins … Clinton Skewers Trump’s Economic Policy … Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, spoke in Columbus, Ohio, on Tuesday, criticizing Donald J. Trump’s plans for the economy. –New York Times
Every time a law is passed or a regulation is applied, it diminishes prosperity for some at the expense of others.
Voluntary competition and cooperation are building blocks of wealth.
Unfortunately, in the US today, major politicians don’t recognize any of this (with the exception perhaps of Rand and Ron Paul).
Politicians are sure that if they pass this law or change that regulation somehow things will get better.
This is why the New York Times is able to publish such an enthusiastic article about Ms. Clinton’s economic ideas.
She wants to use government to force people to do certain things. These things, she believes, will help everyone.
But they will not. It is economically illiterate to believe that if you force people to do something, that the outcome will somehow be beneficial to all or most.
Nonetheless, the New York Times seems to believe that price fixing can generate net positives. And Ms. Clinton certainly does.
In her next scheduled public appearance, on Wednesday in Raleigh, N.C., Mrs. Clinton is expected to shift to a more positive message, outlining her vision for what she has labeled a “growth and fairness economy.”
Her plans include increasing the minimum wage, closing tax loopholes that encourage companies to move jobs overseas and expanding benefits for working families.
Clinton spent a good deal of time in her speech criticizing Donald Trump’s economic ideas. To the extent that Trump tries to force people to act in a certain way, he will create disincentives and reduce prosperity.
But that is Trump, not Clinton. Hillary of course has better ideas on how to manipulate the economy. And in her next speech, she will make the argument that her ideas are better because they seem to benefit more people.
But if one looks over the history of economic legislation it should be clear that even the most aggressive leveling doesn’t really help anyone.
The US is some $200 trillion in debt, all in – and most of its citizens are in debt as well. Businesses are fleeing are others are closing. 100 million people don’t work in the mainstream economy.
This is the result of the kinds of actions that politicians have taken to create the “fairness and prosperity” that Hillary hopes to impose.
Forcing people to do certain things, no matter how beneficial it sounds, only creates price-fixes that ultimate impoverish everybody.
Monopoly central banking, price controls, minimum wages, social security, progressive taxation – all these were supposed to help people and provide wealth for those who did not have it.
But you can’t create lasting prosperity by redistributing wealth by force.
Unfortunately, that is what political elections are about.
Hillary – unless she is indicted and drops out of the race – will get a respectful hearing in the major media because her price-fixing ideas will be put in the context of benefiting the majority of voters.
But even a cursory look at the US economy should convince voters that trying to provide prosperity by force doesn’t work.
It’s an elite dominant social theme. Elites love wealth distribution because they usually control who benefits.
It would be funny if it weren’t so sad. Ms. Clinton and others will go on talk shows and give speeches on ways to create prosperity. But what won’t ever be talked about is that such prescriptions are fundamentally warnings to wealthier people.
These warnings suggest that some people will have to give up yet more wealth so others can benefit. And they will threaten people with imprisonment and worse if they don’t obey.
Like other “progressive” politicians, Ms. Clinton sounds well-meaning but really her proposals – the proposals of almost all politicians – suggest using the power of government to steal from some to give to others.
This is not a “platform.” It is malfeasance.
There is an entire rhetoric that has sprung up around political dialogue. The fundamental force is never acknowledged. The price-fixing is never grappled with.
But this is the fundamental flaw of modern democracy. It has turned into an argument over ways to justifying stealing.
The stealing is known as “policy” but it is nothing price-fixing, and price-fixing only distorts and misaligns resources, thus impoverishing everyone.
Conclusion: At root, like all political “policies,” Clinton’s proposals will promise increased wealth but won’t deliver. They will end up making people poorer and more miserable. Her foreign policies are even worse, emphasizing force and continued US warring. The combination of elevated, domestic theft and increased, organized violence abroad is her “platform.” People won’t understand until it is too late.