Staff Reports
Vice President Kamala Harris recently unveiled her economic plan, presumably in hopes of securing the votes needed for the upcoming election. It seems her strategy involves sprinkling a bit of fairy dust on the economy and hoping for the best—an approach not too different from the magical thinking that often accompanies progressive policies. As her supporters rally around this proposal, others take a closer look and can’t help but roll their eyes.
In discussions among readers of the New York Post, the reaction to Harris’ economic plan has been anything but unanimous. Critics argue that her focus on expansive government spending and interventions doesn’t reflect the real needs of everyday Americans. Instead, it seems akin to offering a cookie-cutter approach to fixing what she claims is a broken system. Unfortunately, if one size fits all, then those air-filled inflatable pool toys at the dollar store would be the gold standard for quality.
Kamala Harris' new economic plan: Letters to the Editor — Aug. 20, 2024 – New York Post https://t.co/Qpyf9C02t6
— Ron Brady (@Romeobravo30) August 19, 2024
Harris’ plan suggests that increased subsidies and governmental support will magically turn the economy around. Yet, many observers point out that this infamous playbook has failed in the past, leaving taxpayers shouldering the burden of bigger budgets and dwindling results. It’s reminiscent of the children’s game “Hot Potato,” but instead of passing around a warm spud, it’s government debt that has been handed off, perpetually never quite resolved yet always growing.
Conservative Americans are left with the question of whether these proposals hold any merit when they would prefer measures that promote fiscal responsibility and economic freedom. After all, making the government bigger hasn’t exactly shown any great results in terms of job creation or wage growth. One can only wonder if Harris believes in this overzealous spending as a real boost or if she sees it more as a grand experiment—a gamble made with other people’s money.
The general sentiment shared by many conservative circles is that Harris’ plan appears to be another version of what has been tried and failed before. Instead of sweeping reforms that would empower individuals and small businesses, it seems her proposal is a call for more significant governmental oversight and economic meddling. In the end, it looks like conservative voters are gearing up for a striking contrast: a financially sound future versus a continued trend of reckless fiscal adventures. This is a choice that will surely influence their decisions at the ballot box when election day rolls around.
