It's not especially remarkable that House Democrats once summoned fellow liberal Donald Trump to Capitol Hill to testify about the alleged adverse effects of Ronald Reagan's 1986 tax reforms. What is somewhat remarkable is that this clip wasn't dug up by a conservative opposition research team, but rather by Trump's own campaign -- which proceeded to blast it out into the public bloodstream as evidence that "Mr. Trump" is an all-caps EXPERT on economic matters. And what conclusion did his "expertise" produce? I'll let Trump answer that question in his own words. Again, this comes via Trump's social media director, who -- ta da! -- can't vote for his boss today because he's not a Republican:
[youtube]https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/722239332631732225[/youtube]
Twitchy has the transcript:
So this tax act was just an absolute catastrophe for the country, for the real estate industry, and I really hope that something can be done — as Congressman Thomas recently said, that something can be done to change at least parts of it, because it has taken all incentive away from investing in real estate, and real estate really means so many jobs...by having cut the high income tax rates to 25 percent, as an example, people don’t have the incentive any more to invest. They’re saying, “Why should I take a chance on investing in low or moderate-income housing? I might as well just pay the tax.†But the fact is, that 25 percent for high-income people — for high-income people — it should be raised substantially with the understanding that if you invest, you can get it down and down substantially below that number...I was asked to come by the Chairman, and I make this plea that, if something isn’t done to put the incentive back — I mean, we’re no different right now than the Soviet Union. They have no incentive, and we have no incentive. And if something isn’t done to quickly put the incentive back, this country is going to be in very deep problems.
Trump called Reagan's tax cuts an "absolute catastrophe for the country," demanding that income tax rates be raised as a means of spurring investments in his industry. After all, the new policy rendered the US "no different than the Soviet Union," or something. He added that slashing the top rate to 25 percent was a "disaster." Say, under Donald J. Trump's current (fiscally incoherent, deficit-exploding) tax plan, is he proposing to reduce the top income bracket tax rate, perchance? He is, as a matter of fact -- to, ahem, 25 percent, while also pushing nonsense spending cuts, insisting on "building up" America's military (while also cutting defense spending), and rejecting entitlement reforms that are mathematically necessary to curb the biggest drivers of our long-term debt. But Mr. Trump believes in tax cuts now, which is all that matters, Trump defenders will argue. Except he just got through ripping Scott Walker for not raising taxes in Wisconsin in order to close a non-existent deficit. People are welcome to believe that Trump has claimed the Reagan mantle (even as he misstates
1980 polling lessons) and would govern as a reliable conservative. But that leap requires a blind faith that ignores his long history of liberalism on virtually every major issue. Remember, if Trump had gotten his way, Reagan would never have been president in the first place -- so those "catastrophic" tax cuts wouldn't have been instituted. Anyway, there's your frontrunner, Republicans.
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/04/19/video-trump-trashes-reagan-tax-cuts-as-democratcalled-expert-witness-in-1991-n2151131
