The issue of Trump's four bankruptcies,
yet again, came up in conversation, and this time around, the real
estate developer not only argued that Chapter 11 is par for the course
in business but that it might also make him better equipped to handle
America's money problems. "I came out great, but I guess I'm supposed to
come out great. That's what I'm supposed to do for the country," he
said. "We owe $19 trillion. Boy, am I good at solving debt problems.
Nobody can solve it like me."
But perhaps Trump's biggest argument for his economic prowess came in
his closing statement, when he emphasized just how artful a deal he can
make. His evidence: forcing CNBC's hand on shortening the debate.
"In about two minutes, I renegotiated it down to two hours so we can
get the hell out of here," he said. "And I'll do that with the country."
Trump has been the election's most riveting figure in the early going. He initially focused his attention on immigration reform,
calling for a wall to be built between Mexico and the United States and
demanding the deportation of 11 million undocumented immigrants.
He has since rolled out other policies and positions: major tax code overhaul; repeal and replace Obamacare; renegotiate or "break" NAFTA; stop hedge funds from "getting away with murder" on taxes; and impose import tariffs as high as 35%.
All while keeping the deficit in check, growing the economy and leaving
entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security untouched.
Those who fear Trump's plans should find common cause with those who
love them: "I'm not sure how much of what he actually says today will be
his positions a year from now," said Michael Busler, professor of
finance at Stockton University.
While Trump certainly has some grandiose ideas -- and equally lofty
rhetoric to accompany them -- deciphering the exact nature of his
economic policies is a complex task, according to John Hudak, a fellow
in governance studies at Washington, D.C.-based think tank the Brookings Institution.
Not to mention the fact that if he does make it to the Oval Office,
Trump won't have a free pass from Congress, even if it remains under the
control of the Republican Party (as you'll see, many of his positions
don't exactly hew closely to GOP policies).
Taking legislative hurdles out of the equation, what will the U.S. economy and markets look like if Trump becomes No. 45.
Trump's Expensive Immigration Plan
Trump's immigration plans cost him a handful of business deals, but they might cost the United States much more.
The American Action Forum, a right-leaning policy institute based in Washington D.C., estimates
that immediately and fully enforcing current immigration law, as Trump
has suggested, would cost the federal government from $400 billion to
$600 billion. It would shrink the labor force by 11 million workers,
reduce the real GDP by $1.6 trillion and take 20 years to complete
(Trump has said he could do it in 18 months).
"It will harm the U.S. economy," said Doug Holtz-Eakin, president of
the American Action Forum and chief economic policy adviser to Sen. John
McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. "Immigration is an enormous source
of economic vitality."
The impact would be felt on both supply and demand.
A number of industries that depend heavily on cheap immigrant labor
would be devastated -- especially agriculture. "There would be an abrupt
drop in farm income and a sharp rise in food prices," said
John McLaren, professor of economics at the University of Virginia with
expertise in international trade, economic development and the political
economy.
Companies that sell to the immigrant population would be affected as
well, leading to decreased revenues for local businesses and a loss of
American jobs.
"Immigrants, whether they are legal or illegal, always spend a
portion of their earnings in the location where they have their jobs,"
McLaren said. "And in a lot of our urban centers, this is actually an
important part of the economy."
He pointed to the case of Postville, Iowa,
where in 2008 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raided a
slaughterhouse and meat packing plant, detaining 389 undocumented
workers (and jailing 300 of them). The raid caused most of the more than
1,000 immigrants not caught to leave the town of 2,300, devastating the
local economy in the process.
He also noted his own research,
which suggests each immigrant creates 1.2 local jobs for local workers,
most of which go to U.S. natives. "Obviously, those jobs would
disappear if the undocumented were just yanked away," he said.
Trump has also discussed reducing the number of jobs held by legal
immigrants, namely by increasing the prevailing wage requirements for
H-1B visas (visas that allow U.S. employers to recruit and employ
foreign professionals). The Republican contender's thesis is that doing
so would force companies to give jobs to domestic employees instead of
overseas workers. The maneuver would benefit some, but not most.
"If I'm an American software programmer, I probably would benefit
somewhat from making it harder for highly-skilled software programmers
from elsewhere," McClaren said. "It's really hard to argue that the
country, as a whole, benefits from that. It would be bad for most
Americans, and it certainly would be bad for corporations."
An extreme anti-immigration policy could also cause collateral damage
to the American image. "What's the American brand after we've rounded
up 11 million people and sent them packing?" said Jim Pethokoukis, a
columnist and blogger at the American Enterprise Institute, a center-right think tank based on Washington, D.C. "Do people still view America the same way?"
No comments:
Post a Comment