Why Hillary Clinton is the woman America needs for 2016

With the soap opera of the Republican nominations taking over the U.S. political scene, the Democrats have been somewhat overshadowed. The few who are focusing on the Democratic elections have seen a clear frontrunner come through: Hillary Clinton. Despite the astonishing rise of Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton still remains the overwhelming favourite to be the Democratic candidate for 2016, and for good reason. Unlike the radical policies of Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton actually has feasible policies that can work in real life, as well as on paper. Too much of politics in the past 30 years or so has been dominated by broken promises, with politicians not being able to do what they promised to the people. One of the ways to combat this is by actually introducing realistic policies in the first place, which will both boost the economy and not leave people with a sour taste in their mouth. The first policy of Mrs. Clinton’s which I advocate is the profit sharing scheme.

For too long, corporations have been taking all the profits and not sharing them to their backbone: the working people. The infamous “Reaganomics” or “trickle-down economics”, as you might call it, has been famously debunked as corporations just do not want to share their profits. And after all, why would they? There is frankly no legislation put in place which binds them to do this, and as evidenced countless times throughout history, corporations will not change the way they operate unless you force them to. The tax credit she is introducing will make sure that businesses, especially small ones, have the money required to introduce this profit sharing plan, and the cap on the tax credit makes sure that businesses do not take more than they need. In periods of economic decline, such as the 2008 global recession, businesses have looked to workers for help, yet when business is booming, the worker rarely gets their just reward. This profit sharing plan would make sure that while profits are high, the workers get paid more for their labour. This also provides an incentive for workers to work harder, as they know that there is a reward for doing so, and this logically will increase productivity. It is one of the only win-win policies in politics at the moment, and for this reason, it must be implemented.

It’s no surprise that income inequality has ballooned in recent decades, with high ranking executives and presidents sometimes getting as much as a thousand times more pay as their workers. To make America’s economy fairer, this growing problem needs to be abated. Raising the minimum wage is the first step to doing this. This will also boost the economy in the long run because we are actually giving spending power to the masses, and not just the 1%. With increased spending, there is also increased investment, and thus the economy is boosted. It would also make workers feel like they are actually getting paid proportionally to their labour, which, as aforementioned, will increase productivity. This will also protect workers from being exploited without their knowledge, as the corporations will know that if found out, their reputation may never be the same, and, perhaps most importantly, they might have to pay a fee for this misdemeanour.

Clinton also wants to encourage long term investment by introducing a substantially increased capital gains tax on short term investments, which will progressively decrease year by year. It has been seen from history that economic growth is contemporaneous with increased long term investments, and I firmly believe that this correlation is more than just that, a correlation, and that long term investment actually does encourage economic growth. Too many people have focused on short term gains in the past, not looking towards their long term futures. This plan will both abate the aforesaid problem and give the government more money to invest in scientific programs to cure diseases, for example. It will also help get Americans out of debt, as hopefully their long term investments will yield a sizeable return. When people are out of debt, their spending power increases, which will boost the economy as well. However, the main focus of Clinton’s policies are not to boost the economy, but to make the economy fairer. A developed country such as America should not have the gargantuan levels of income inequality that it does now, and the person to abate this problem is not Bernie Sanders, nor (obviously) Donald Trump or Jeb Bush, but Hillary Clinton.

20 Comments Add yours

  1. epicflyingcat says:

    Totally agree, I don’t read much on US politics but all the other candidates sound like a total joke.

    Like

  2. Adi says:

    i will raminate upon this

    Like

    1. You mean ruminate? Cool to see someone’s thinking about my articles, don’t overdo it though 🙂

      Like

  3. Frank says:

    Hillary will win it is already set up. If u go back 15 years u will see Hillary has been in more scandals, committed more fraud, cheated more people for personnel wealth. U think she is in it to help the country what r u 15 years old. Like her Husband Bill who was more worried about Monica Lewinsky then Osama Bin Laden. Rem democrats all bitched n said no when Bush wanted $100 million for flak jacket for r military then Obama/Hillary spent 3 trillion losing over 50 billion the first month n Not even looking for it . yes 50 billion. I feel sorry because my kids will pay.

    Like

  4. Frank says:

    Rem Hilary said give every body a home.
    She made millions n the home market collapsed. If u here enough BS u start to believe it. She will give u the moon if she think she can make a buck.

    Like

  5. Keith says:

    I disagree with your part on Bernie Sanders. Bernie and Hillary are practically the same candidate. I wouldn’t put too much trust in Hillary though because of her private email scandal. I think Bernie is he democrat winner

    Like

    1. I doubt Sanders’ radical socialist policies will be able to get any sort of substantial backing to beat Hillary.

      Like

      1. Yeah radical socialist policies like…raising the minimum wage, making college free, and challenging the 1% on their tax fraud. Oh wait…those are just democratic ideas.

        Howard Zinn was a democratic socialist.

        Like

      2. Thanks for the comment 🙂 When I say radical socialist policies, I mean increasing the tax on the 1% to huge levels, meaning that they will eventually leave – a hallmark of radical socialism, as seen in France.

        Like

      3. Shrey, which tax are you referring to? If it’s the income tax, there is no indication that Sanders will raise it. He has planned on raising the capital gains tax, reinstating the estate tax, and implementing a .1% sales tax on Wall Street trading. Most of those things have been practiced in America before and didn’t result it totalitarian socialist regimes.

        Like

  6. I feel that Hillary will win but like Bernie as an individual. But as you know good individuals hardly make good politicians.

    Like

  7. caffeintweek says:

    A lot of the critisizm is great. Hilary is to ambiguous with her views, she teeters off what the masses want, which isn’t bad. If policies and laws are not made when society is knocking on the door then the government isn’t doing its job (well it still does its job..) in all realness we need to lower college costs and support smaller businesses. Just an eye opener businesses have unlimited funding to give to policial campaigns thanks to Obama (think about Federal Judeges). Corporate America is getting to big

    Liked by 1 person

  8. From a financial point of view you may think she’s ideal, but if you look at it from a political perspective, she supports Israel, basically meaning she supports genocide and the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.She’s also pro-drone strikes, and her feminism is mainly centred around the struggles of white women and fails to notice the struggles of people of colour.

    Like

  9. Eric Zuesse says:

    She’s the one candidate I’d never vote for, and the links in the following article provide the many reasons why I wouldn’t:
    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/03/clinton-coal-will-part-energy-mix-years-come-u-s-around-world.html

    Like

    1. Yeah, since this article, I’ve kinda changed my mind to support Bernie as the best of all the evils.

      Like

  10. Freethinker says:

    A post written about one month after this when defends trickle-down economics after you attack it here. So which is it?

    Like

    1. I’ve changed my view on trickle-down; I don’t agree with it anymore 🙂 Thanks for the comment!

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Freethinker says:

        Same with me. I grew up very conservative and slowly became at odds with the idea.

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s