Economical strategy proposal during the presidential debates. Clinton as a Robin Hood

Clinton as Robin Hood
[Name]
[Institution affiliation]

Since Bill Clinton has explicitly compared himself to Robin Hood on the 4th of September, the question of Robin Hood economics has returned to the political debate with force. (“Bill Clinton Defends ‘Robin Hood’ Family Foundation,” 2016) The Democrats have pitched their campaign on the premise that they will improve the poor American life by taking from the rich. Clinton says that her administration would focus on a system that Economy that works for everyone in America’s society. The main proposal is to impose taxes on Wall Street. (Miller, 2016) In the current statistics, democrats and republicans do not differ much when it comes to the perfect tax rate with Republicans advocating for 33% and the Democrats 42%. Hillary Clinton’s suggestion could push these figures to 65%. According to the Republican’s candidate Donald Trump, such a rise will only contribute to further job losses in the US. (“Editorial voices from elsewhere,” 2016)
These systems proposed by Clinton involve the creation of new, good jobs with a rising income. Her policies include the creation of the jobs through investment in renewable energy, infrastructure, raising the minimum wage, concentrating on improving female livelihood, profit sharing, and developing small businesses. Also, she considers it an economic advantage to focus on family welfare such as the relationship between education, work, leave, and child care. (“FULL: Donald Trump Vs Hillary Clinton – First Presidential Debate 2016 – Hofstra University NY”) The profit sharing segment which is the primary focus of the campaign is the essence of Robin Hood taxes and the call for ‘enhancing accountability’ through the closure of corporate loopholes.

She adds that she will not only target big banks but the whole sector. However, these policies are not convincing. These remarks assume that Wall Street is responsible for the rest of the American’s challenges. (Barone, 2016) In reality, the American financial problem stretches further than the Wall Street conduct into fiscal policies and global trade challenges.
Providing free or cheap assistance to low-income Americans through university fee waiver and health care is a great idea but tough to achieve. (Resnikoff, 2015) Currently, the annual fee for a university student in a public university is approximately 30000 dollars. On one side, this amount is too high for low-income families to afford. On the other hand, when financial assistance is received to cater for the students, most of them have ended up owing educational loans that they pay well into their pension years. (Egan, 2016) The proposal to introduce fee or at least education is, therefore, essential to many Americans. However, the government will need massive resources to roll out such a plan. Besides, it can be anticipated that there will be an exponential increase in the number of students joining university once it becomes free. This will create immense pressure that will probably lead to an increase in taxes. (Snell, 2016) It is important that the Democrats explain where such an amount will come from.
According to Donald Trumps, Clinton’s proposal fails on multiple levels. Wealthy industry owners in the US have a larger capacity to create jobs. To raise employment opportunities, the Unites States then needs to have policies that encourage this segment to operate within borders. This makes sense because it is impossible to create jobs when industries are closing down and relocating. (“FULL: Donald Trump Vs Hillary Clinton – First Presidential Debate 2016 – Hofstra University NY”) According to Trump, hefty taxes proposed by Clinton will lead to a further mass relocation of companies. He also points to trade agreements that substantially diminish the business capability of the US against other businesses. Trump, therefore, sees it as essential that the country renegotiates its trade agreements such as to encourage domestic production and trade. In contrast to Clinton’s Robin Hood taxes to provide free education and healthcare to the middle class and low-income families, Trump says that lowering taxes will bring back jobs to the US and therefore enable American people to work for their living. (“FULL: Donald Trump Vs Hillary Clinton – First Presidential Debate 2016 – Hofstra University NY”)
According to Trump, former leaders have run the country on pure bureaucracy regarding trade. For example, he points out to the difficulty is in bringing money back from overseas a process that makes individuals prefer to invest abroad. The US has overwhelming debt levels coupled with deplorable infrastructure. This means that higher taxation on the rich would still end up in federal executives pockets through misappropriations. Government contracts are awarded to extravagant companies, and goods are bought at higher prices that they should be. Instead, expansion of business is ensured to develop the local community. To achieve this, Trump feels that America needs a president who knows how to do business.
Peter Navarro, speaking on CNN in August called the Clinton approach a cyclical Keynesian approach to economics. According to him, the Robin Hood approach assumes that if you redistribute wealth and add a couple of stimulus programs, then everything will work out. (Shanon, 2012) This is the kind of economic model that is blamed for America’s misery for the past 20 years. Navarro supports Trump’s financial reform strategy which is aimed at changing the energy sector, tax sector, regulatory sector and the trade sector. (“CNN.com – Transcripts”, 2016) This is a reform that Navarro perceives as able to generate enough revenue and increase employment opportunities in a way that is beneficial to the average American citizen.
In justification for their program, Clinton refers to Donald Trump’s economic policy as repackaged trickle down economy. According to her, his economic regime favors big corporations at the expense of the average person. Speaking in the same sitting with Navarro, Professor Reich argues that the Republican proposal is ignorant of how a real economy works. He quotes Moods speculation that suggests Trump’s proposal would increase the unemployment rate to 7%. (“CNN.com – Transcripts”, 2016) The Democrats suggest that the increase in taxes could benefit the American citizens in two ways. Levying taxes on stock trading would raise a lot of revenue for the government. In addition to this, it would reduce the frequency with which transactions are made. (Snell, 2016) This equalizes trade as stock trades are not able to sell quickly at an advantage over other investors. However, critics see this as double taxation. Stock traders are already taxed on the income that is generated from these ventures. Double taxation would discourage investment reducing income.
References
Barone, M. (2016). Robin Hood Economics Falls Flat in Debates. National Review. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://www.nationalreview.com/article/440802/hillary-clintons-tax-rich-plan-unpersuasive
Bill Clinton Defends ‘Robin Hood’ Family Foundation. (2016). Fox News Insider. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://insider.foxnews.com/2016/09/06/bill-clinton-defends-himself-clinton-foundation-robin-hood
CNN.com – Transcripts. (2016). Edition.cnn.com. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1608/09/cnr.19.html
Editorial voices from elsewhere. (2016). Observer-Reporter. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://www.observer-reporter.com/20161007/editorial_voices_from_elsewhere
Egan, M. (2016). The Bernie Sanders plan to fix income inequality. CNNMoney. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://money.cnn.com/2015/05/21/news/economy/bernie-sanders-income-inequality-2016/FULL: Donald Trump vs Hillary Clinton – First Presidential Debate 2016 – Hofstra University NY. (2016). YouTube. Retrieved 10 October 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEHPrYUcoi0
Miller, J. (2016). The Clinton and Sanders Plans to Rein In Wall Street | Dollars & Sense.Dollarsandsense.org. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from http://dollarsandsense.org/archives/2016/0316miller.html
Shanon, J. (2012). Keynesian Economics, the Cancer in America. Authorhouse.
Snell, K. (2016). Sanders and the Robin Hood tax; a new price tag for Clinton’s tax plan and the political divide on inversions. Washington Post. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/01/27/sanders-and-the-robin-hood-tax-a-new-price-tag-for-clintons-tax-plan-and-the-political-divide-on-inversions/
Snell, K. (2016). Sanders goes Robin Hood with plan to make Wall Street pay for college. Washington Post. Retrieved 9 October 2016, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/01/26/sanders-goes-robin-hood-with-plan-to-make-wall-street-pay-for-college/