Hillary Clinton’s Mistake on Taxes

[elleng]

*For decades, Republicans owned the debate over taxes. They were the party that wanted to cut your taxes. Democrats, in the minds of many voters, wanted to raise taxes to pay for dubious programs.

In 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama shrewdly flipped the story. He explained that while his opponent, John McCain, was offering a larger total tax cut, the bulk of it would go to the rich. Obama would focus his tax cuts on everyone but the rich – and give those families more as a result.

A poll shortly before the election found that voters understood the distinction, which caused Neil Newhouse, a Republican pollster, to say, “It’s a stunning reversal of fortune on a core Republican strength.”. .

But Clinton’s campaign has also made a policy mistake, in my view, by not offering a specific tax cut for the middle class and poor. There’s a good argument for one, given the weak income growth of the last 15 years.

Republicans were able to win the tax debate for years because Democrats let them muddle the issue. It’s an unforced and unnecessary error.'

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/28/opinion/campaign-stops/hillary-clintons-mistake-on-taxes.html?

[unblock]

1. it's not too late! oooh, can you imagine trump if she unveils this during the debates?

[tonyt53]

2. Pretty sure the issue of helping the middle class will come up again and more indepth.

[Hortensis]

3. Yes. She hits building the middle class, a humongous issue,

every time. In one way or another it's central to almost all her domestic plans, but she has many directions she has to build from. She doesn't pretend to some magic answer she can get a nation on its feet cheering for.

Governor "Raintax" O'Malley had the same problem. He has great ideas, was a very good progressive governor, and is very competent in thoughtful, closeup one-to-one policy discussions over a table. But he's completely lacking in the ability to deliver magic catchphrases with zealous conviction.

On the plus side, Monday night, for the first time, tens of thousands of new people heard her speak of the importance of investing in the wellbeing of the "middle class" -- multiple times.

Hillary Clinton at the debate:

... as I said, trumped-up trickle-down. Trickle-down did not work. It got us into the mess we were in, in 2008 and 2009. Slashing taxes on the wealthy hasn't worked.
And a lot of really smart, wealthy people know that. And they are saying, hey, we need to do more to make the contributions we should be making to rebuild the middle class.

I don't think top-down works in America. I think building the middle class, investing in the middle class, making college debt-free so more young people can get their education, helping people refinance their -- their debt from college at a lower rate. Those are the kinds of things that will really boost the economy. Broad-based, inclusive growth is what we need in America, not more advantages for people at the very top.
...
And so what I believe is the more we can do for the middle class, the more we can invest in you, your education, your skills, your future, the better we will be off and the better we'll grow. That's the kind of economy I want us to see again.

Btw, highlighting shows that for Trump "middle class" was just a pair of words he used ONCE -- to suggest a major tax break for the wealthy was somehow about them.

[randome]

5. Infrastructure spending would trickle both up and down the economy.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Hortensis]

6. Yes! Combining two two huge needs into one

wonderfully progressive synergy is very central to what she wants to do. So much of the construction of the last big progressive era that helped erase much of the poverty of the Depression is still in use today.

And it's not all about helping those in the middle class now. The Tennessee Valley Authority was meant to transform one of the poorest regions of our nation, including wiping out endemic diseases, and largely succeeded. The 10-20-30 plan H supports would direct 10% of federal investment to communities where 20% of the population have lived below the poverty line for 30 years--in other words a major effort to transform the most intransigent pockets of poverty into places where residents can participate in the American dream.

[BootinUp]

4. The campaign is not over. Wouldn't surprise me

if they roll out additional details on their economic plan. Truth is, it already is a very good plan for the middle class.