In an effort to turn himself into more than just an image of anger toward establishment politics, Trump released a skeletal plan last week of how he would eliminate the national debt. The problem is, the facts aren’t on his side. According to Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler, not only is Trump’s plan to eliminate our debt wrong, but so are his figures about how much more debt America will collect in the next eight years.
Is releasing a nonsensical plan in some effort to sound presidential really a good strategy at all?
Along the campaign trail recently, Trump has been feeling the heat of Cruz catching up in the polls. Cruz beat out Trump in the Wisconsin primary Tuesday, setting a quake along Trump’s campaign. Are people realizing the joke that is the Trump campaign? Where are his strategists to shake the man and tell him that his economic plans should have some sense in them?
Let’s refer back to Kessler and his fact-checking article that helps shed light on just how over his head Trump would be in the Oval Office. Kessler points out, “… before Trump can start paying down the debt, he needs to eliminate the deficit — which year after year, is adding to the national debt,” he wrote. “According to a January projection … the federal government will run an additional $6.8 trillion in additional deficits between 2017 and 2024.”
There is more money that needs to be taken care of than the Trump camp has planned for. Where are his financial advisors? Does Trump even bother to hire them or does he think he can figure it out on his own?
In Kessler’s Washington Post article, he breaks apart the actual plan the businessman lays out to fix the debt.
“Let’s assume Trump’s trade initiatives don’t lead to trade wars and recessions but a bountiful, booming economy,” Kessler wrote. “We checked historical records and found that revenues in the last half century once reached a peak of 20 percent of GDP in 2000.
“But even if revenues achieved 20 percent of GDP year after year, that would only add another $4 trillion in revenue over eight years,” Kessler added. “Trump is still $12 trillion short.”
A Trump advisor told NBC News that Trump’s office would be willing to sell off government assets (offshore oil zones, etc.). But even then, those assets are only valued to be at $3.2 trillion, so Trump is still short on the money to truly eliminate all debt.
Empty promises and backtracked comments are what sufficiently make Trump an untrustworthy candidate. This statement seems to utterly shut down any chance of nuclear deals being made in a Trump presidency. Can people really trust a man who may brag of creating thought-out, “beautiful” plans to defeat ISIS, lowering taxes and stopping illegal immigration, yet can’t even get the facts right when hinting at what action he’d really take in the Oval Office?
With the amount of fact checking that exposes the holes in Trump’s first detailed economic plan, what are his voters expecting? Can we view this blunder of a plan as another example of how a majority of Trump supporters willingly turn a blind eye to any criticism of the man?
Sure, politics have always been a game of playing a character to gain voters’ trust and then playing with hearts to keep confidence by spouting more rhetoric. But this election has gone too far in this notion. Trusting a candidate simply because they are funny and inexperienced is just ludicrous. Facts are facts, and with economic blueprints like this, how can we trust a man to really put our nation’s money in the right place?