As the election season rolls on into the decisive phase, eyes are on how the promises and proposals of Vice President Kamala Harris might stand up against the economic prowess of ex-President Donald J. Trump. Both political figures have expressed remarkably similar aspirations for the U.S. economy. However, the strategies they propose to realize those aims significantly differ.
Harris, the Vice President, has delineated her economic strategy in an extensive 82-page manifestoed volume, loaded with proposals targeting housing, taxes, and health care. Supporters were given an insight into her economic vision during a recent campaign meet in Pittsburgh.
Our former President, Donald J. Trump, takes a different, more succinct approach to policy outlines. The ‘issues’ section on his campaign’s website is characteristically succinct, preferring concise promises of tax cuts over lengthy manifestos. The clarity and directness of his message have always been Trump’s strong points, captivating audiences with distinct solutions like a proposed 20% tariff on imported goods, the deportation of millions to alleviate the housing crisis, or the bold pledge to slash energy prices by fifty percent within his first year.
Despite the nontraditional and sometimes spontaneous nature of his proposed policies, Trump continues to lead in the economic polls, with his advantage reducing only slightly. While some economists voice concerns about potentially stalling growth, increased consumer prices, and the federal deficit, Trump’s commitment to actionable, direct courses seems to resonate more with voters.
Trump’s efficient and catchy promises clearly resonate with the public. The core of his message – reducing taxes, limiting regulation, and fostering more domestic trade – played a crucial role in his ascent to presidency in the past. Many Americans still harbor a fond memory of the prosperous economy witnessed during the early years of the Trump administration, untarnished by subsequent pandemics or bouts of inflation.
In the final stages of the Presidential race, it is intriguing to see if Harris’s more elaborated, though yet to be fully fleshed out, policy proposals can compare favorably against Trump’s highlights.
Surprisingly, in an atmosphere of deep-seated political polarization, Harris and Trump have shown a surprising unity in their economic goals – lowering costs and regulations, offering tax cuts for middle-income citizens, and incentivizing businesses to produce domestically.
The real division surfaces in their strategies for realizing these goals and the tactics to effectively market these strategies to the public.
Trump, for instance, proposes banning certain foreign-grown edible products to reduce grocery expenses. He intends to manage electricity and fuel costs by promoting deregulation in the energy sector and encouraging more oil and gas exploration. Some economists, though, question the feasibility of these notions reaching their proposed outcomes.
Harris’s comprehensive 82-page plan addresses these issues using very distinct tactics. To alleviate rent and mortgage burdens, she proposes a $25,000 tax credit for new homeowners and a considerable investment in increasing the housing supply nationwide. She also promises a federal ban on ‘price gouging’ by grocery stores in an attempt to control food costs.
Harris promotes fewer tariffs compared to Trump and promises tax incentives to foster domestic production of low-carbon energy tech, biotech, and other advanced sectors. Moreover, she advocates for expanding tax breaks for parents, specifically those with infants, to aid them in meeting the costs of childcare.
Trump’s economical notions can be challenging to categorize ideologically, given his profound conservative commitment to minimizing corporate taxation, juxtaposed with an anti-free trade sentiment that has typically been associated with left-leaning views. However, Trump has successfully crafted a new economic narrative for the Republican Party over the past eight years.
Harris, after being abruptly launched atop the Democratic ticket this summer, has had a limited timeframe to articulate her economic message. She has attempted to contrast her policies with those of Trump, voicing concerns over his lack of detailed proposals.
Despite any criticism, Trump remains unperturbed, seeming to enjoy his flexible policy approach and the freedom in his speeches. His campaign seems equally prepared to challenge Harris on her policy specifics, offering pointed criticism to Harris’s proposals such as tagging her anti-price gouging sentiment as ‘price controls’.