Campaign Nuts and Bolts: Economists Prefer Clinton

When economists stack Hillary's ideas against the Donald's, Hillary's ideas win.

Clinton's plans "trump" Trump's. Is America listening? Let's hope so.

Well-respected Wall St. economist Mark Zandi has looked at the economic plans of the two candidates, and Hillary Clinton comes out on top. Zandi's outfit, Moody's Analytics, took a look:

If the first rule of politics is first, do no harm, Hillary Clinton is the presidential candidate of choice when it comes to the U.S. economy.

That’s the implied conclusion of a detailed analysis of Clinton’s economic proposals by Moody’s Analytics, which released a similar analysis of Donald Trump’s economic proposals in June. The difference between the two plans is stark. “Secretary Clinton’s economic proposals will result in a somewhat stronger U.S. econ­omy,” Moody’s concluded.

And Trump’s plan? “The economy will be significantly weaker if Mr. Trump’s economic proposals are adopted,” Moody’s says. “Income will stagnate, and stock prices and real house values will decline.”

(Links in the above quote are not mine, they're the author's. I left them for you to explore.)

Okay, voters, listen and learn. Trump talks, er, the talk. Clinton walks the walk, as in her ideas work because they have worked. Econ 101. Trump's don't because they haven't. Again, Econ 101.

Another side of this is that the poor and working class spend their money to survive, which stimulates economic activity, while the rich work to keep their fortunes and pass them on. Yep, Econ 101.

For a good take on the subject, read this.