In what ways do the democrats plan to stimulate economic growth?

Question

blkwdw86 I do know how the democrats are and taxes don't stimulate anything, it actually kills the economy. But I want to know how they plan on making America grow economically.

Answer 1

By redistributing some of the wealth that has concentrated in the hands of the uber-wealthy.

By creating tax benefits that are tailored to help businesses that KEEP their business here, and pay living wages, instead of rewarding those who ooutsource to other countries.

By creating incentives and funding projets that seek to find alternative energy sources.

By puting money into science again. By allowing America to lead in scientific acheivement again.

By working to increase minimum wage, so more people can afford to buy things, thus stimulating the economy. (Every economic study proves that increasing the minimum wage stimulates the economy. EVERY STUDY!!!)

By increasing the number of American who can beome college educated, which enhances the economy in numerous ways, including having better wages, which again, stimulates the economy.

Answer 2

I didn't know they were planning on doing that. I thought that they had other plans -- having a different Iraq policy than the Prez, ignoring the gay marriage issue, allowing stem cell research. ...

I guess you could say that raising the minimum wage is one of the party's goals. But that sure as heck doesn't qualify as a plan for stimulating economic growth. It stimulates the paychecks of a very small number of American workers, which also results in higher consumer prices. If any Democrat thinks that that would be a plan for economic growth, ..................................

Answer 3

Democrat economic stimulation =

1) Tax the wealthiest!
2) Tax Bill Gates!
3) Tax Warren Buffet!
4) Tax the wealthiest!
etc
etc

Simple minds need a simple plan.
Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.

I love the "raise the minimum wage" plan. VERY smart plan. **sarcasm**. Dems show their economic ignorance when they push a "raise the minimum wage" plan as an economic growth policy.

.

Answer 4

In very quite user-friendly words properly first of all that bill replaced into in comparison to this one– then you quite've the certainty that Clinton replaced into in performing some Regan regulations that had no longer seen fruition (even Bush Sr. have been given some super reward of Reaganonmics it somewhat is the reason he have been given his very own coin word – what he did replaced into astounding and yet so very complication-loose) then you quite've the certainty that Clinton had a Republican majority so he had to bypass to the midsection. Do you have that very final bill/law – no longer the 1st proposed one?? and ultimately whilst Bush took over the financial equipment replaced into slumping – for the duration of Reagan we observed a 9% advance in financial advance verses 4% on the top of Clinton verses Bush who (regardless of three important catastrophes) observed an over all 3% advance. i'd be .5% off on those numbers regardless of the undeniable fact that it somewhat is approximately precise. So your argument is incorrect and straightforward. additionally do you be attentive to of ways they “define” deficit and such interior the government??

Answer 5

I haven't heard anything except raise taxes.

And if Clinton's policy was so good, why did we end up in a recession while the gov. had all the money?

Answer 6

increase taxes for the wealthiest two percent. That will increase tax receipts so we can balance the budget and bring long-term interest rates under control. more Tax cuts for the working class so they can spend.

Fight for the working class so they can afford good health care. lower tuition fees and lower the rates for student loans to increase enrollement. an investment in america is an investment in education. in the long run america will be much better.

Similar to Bill Clinton economic plan. He deserves some credit for the great economy of the 1990s.

The Clinton presidency left America with record economic growth and prosperity:
· Average economic growth of 4.0 percent per year, compared to average growth of 2.8 percent during the previous years. The economy grew for 116 consecutive months, the most in history.
· Creation of more than 22.5 million jobs—the most jobs ever created under a single administration, and more than were created in the previous 12 years. Of the total new jobs, 20.7 million, or 92 percent, were in the private sector.
· Economic gains spurred an increase in family incomes for all Americans. Since 1993, real median family income increased by $6,338, from $42,612 in 1993 to $48,950 in 1999 (in 1999 dollars).
· Overall unemployment dropped to the lowest level in more than 30 years, down from 6.9 percent in 1993 to just 4.0 percent in January 2001. The unemployment rate was below 5 percent for 40 consecutive months. Unemployment for African Americans fell from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.3 percent in 2000, the lowest rate on record. Unemployment for Hispanics fell from 11.8 percent in October 1992 to 5.0 percent in 2000, also the lowest rate on record.
· Inflation dropped to its lowest rate since the Kennedy Administration, averaging 2.5 percent, and fell from 4.7 percent during the previous administration.
· The homeownership rate reached 67.7 percent near the end of the Clinton administration, the highest rate on record. In contrast, the homeownership rate fell from 65.6 percent in the first quarter of 1981 to 63.7 percent in the first quarter of 1993.
· The poverty rate also declined from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 11.8 percent in 1999, the largest six-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years. This left 7 million fewer people in poverty than there were in 1993.
· The surplus in fiscal year 2000 was $237 billion—the third consecutive surplus and the largest surplus ever.
· President Clinton reached across the aisle and worked with the Republican-led Congress to enact welfare reform. As a result, welfare rolls dropped dramatically and were the lowest since 1969. Between January 1993 and September of 1999, the number of welfare recipients dropped by 7.5 million (a 53 percent decline) to 6.6 million. In comparison, between 1981-1992, the number of welfare recipients increased by 2.5 million (a 22 percent increase) to 13.6 million people.

Answer 7

Tax, tax, tax. Then tax some more. After that, tax something else. Then tax the taxes. Don't you pay attention to anything?

Answer 8

BY RAISING YOUR TAXES!!! THAT IS THEIR GOAL AND THEIR ANSWER TO EVERY PROBLEM!!! WATCH!! HaHaha!!! THIS LAST VOTE PROVES THAT THIS COUNTRY IS FULL OF IMBECILES!!!

Answer 9

They don't even know what that is.

http://blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-pOypG0szd7Pv_X1rQxw_4qCWpA--?cq=1&p=302

Answer 10

Write to your new congressman or woman and ask them.