November 7, 2016

One last attempt at electioneering

Hey, have you thought about what might happen to your federal tax bill depending on who wins the election? Tax Foundation has.

2016 Government Posted by JohnGalt at November 7, 2016 6:35 PM

Hmm, says the Trump plan will cost me $1400 more... count me in!

Posted by: nanobrewer at November 7, 2016 11:19 PM

If I jiggered our itemized deductions lower, we save about $4k with Trump and $1.5k with Clinton. But the Clinton savings comes from a larger child credit for kids under 5. Only have that for 2 more years.

With my same income, if I were unmarried and childless but had the same itemized deductions, Trump steals $884 less from me while Clinton steals the same.

Posted by: johngalt at November 8, 2016 11:37 AM

I rock with the Trump plan: $2900 with no jiggling. Make my guitar collection great again!

Yet I don't really care for it. I am not by any measure a deficit hawk, but it is not part of a comprehensive plan to restore growth. Bush's cuts (the second, supply-side ones) were part of a growth initiative but failed to some extent because there was no spending discipline.

I don't hear Trump even pretending. We're building walls and instituting maternity leave and increasing entitlements. And cutting taxes!

Yes, his energy policy and regulatory reform might help growth, but magnitudes off.

I could use the $2900 to stock up on bottled water and ammo for the upcoming multi-decadal, global depression.

Posted by: jk at November 8, 2016 12:12 PM

Actually, it is precisely a comprehensive plan to restore growth. To a rate of 3.5-4% per year.

Posted by: johngalt at November 8, 2016 5:46 PM

The lack of specificity on spending controls and entitlement reform is part of a "get elected first" strategy, which is hard enough without raising the those issues during an election campaign.

Posted by: johngalt at November 8, 2016 5:49 PM

The comprehensive pal "Read Donald J. Trump’s Plan to Create 25 Million Jobs, here" to which you link seems to have been removed from the site.

Posted by: jk at November 8, 2016 6:45 PM

Not removed, but the link is definitely redirected. The more general description is at this link.

Posted by: johngalt at November 9, 2016 11:41 AM | What do you think? [7]