Kamala Harris’s Economic Plan: A Path to Failure

Vice President Kamala Harris's economic proposals have sparked controversy, with critics warning that her policies could lead to severe economic repercussions. Key elements of her agenda, such as increased taxes, government intervention, and a heavy reliance on green energy, are seen by many as harmful to the U.S. economy. Analysts argue that her plans not only ignore critical economic realities but could also worsen inflation, reduce investment, and exacerbate inequality.

One of the central components of Harris's plan is a significant tax increase on high earners and corporations. Harris advocates for a 28% corporate tax rate, a substantial jump from the current 21% established under the Trump administration's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Critics contend that this will stifle business investment and drive corporations to relocate operations overseas. As businesses face higher tax burdens, job creation and wage growth could slow, reversing the progress seen under the previous tax cuts​.

Kamala's economic plan is taking shape, starting with *5 trillion dollars* in new taxes.

These include a 39.6% top rate on small business, the highest-ever capital gains tax, and taking the corporate rate from one of the best in the world to one of the worst — higher than… pic.twitter.com/BwrGiMiDFb

— Peter St Onge, Ph.D. (@profstonge) August 28, 2024

In addition to corporate tax hikes, Harris’s support for taxing unrealized capital gains is viewed as particularly damaging. This approach would tax wealth that has not yet been realized through the sale of assets, essentially taxing entrepreneurs and investors on paper gains that could vanish with market fluctuations. Experts argue that such policies would discourage innovation and investment, jeopardizing America's position as a global leader in technology and entrepreneurship.

Harris has also doubled down on minimum wage increases and other labor policies that critics argue are inflationary. While higher wages might seem beneficial to workers, economists have pointed out that these costs are often passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. For example, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York found that increased wages in grocery stores contributed to higher food prices, contradicting Harris’s claim that corporate greed is the root cause of rising grocery bills.

Just Perfect! Kamala Harris economic adviser confirms plan to tax unrealized gains!!!!! pic.twitter.com/VY5J2polLq

— Tim McClone (@themcclonebrot1) August 28, 2024

Another major point of concern is Harris's housing policy. Harris has called for measures to stimulate demand for housing but has largely ignored the supply-side issues that drive housing shortages. Without addressing local government barriers to new construction, her policies could worsen the housing crisis by increasing demand without a corresponding rise in supply. This would likely lead to higher housing prices and increased homelessness, especially in urban areas where housing is already scarce.

On energy policy, Harris has shifted her stance on fracking, claiming to support it while simultaneously backing President Biden's aggressive green energy agenda. Her critics argue that this inconsistency raises doubts about her commitment to an all-inclusive energy strategy. Harris’s green energy proposals, according to experts, would undermine local economies reliant on fossil fuel industries, leading to job losses and higher energy costs for consumers. Furthermore, many argue that the billions of dollars Harris plans to invest in green technologies will not significantly impact global emissions, as countries like China continue to rely heavily on coal​.

Lastly, Harris’s handling of inflation has drawn intense criticism. While she has promised to combat rising costs, her proposed solutions—such as increasing government spending—are seen as counterproductive. Critics compare her approach to "American Peronism," a reference to the socialist policies of former Argentine President Juan Perón, which led to economic ruin in Argentina. Harris’s plans to spend and print more money, while attacking businesses for “price gouging,” are seen as upside-down economics that have historically failed​.

In sum, Harris’s economic policies are being characterized by her detractors as reckless and poorly conceived. By increasing taxes, expanding government intervention, and embracing unrealistic energy goals, Harris could harm the very middle-class workers she claims to protect. As the debate intensifies, the question remains: will her policies lift up the economy, or drive it further into decline?