There are so many things wrong with what he's said.
#1 is just vague nonsense that's usually impractical. It's kind of amusing that he references his time in the mid-90's as so great for the budget. What happened at that time? Broad tax increases at the start of Clinton's first term.
2# is a collection of mostly useless or not worth doing. Payroll tax relief can be effective help but there are much better ways of benefiting people without losing a ton of revenue. Capital gains taxes are not going to cause catastrophe, and
cutting them hasn't been particularly useful, so this hardly benefits the average worker anyway, and citing Alan Greenspan as your backup for good economic advice? LOL.
Cutting the tax on businesses is, again, a nice idea that doesn't have any major hard benefits other than psychological ones. In a
report from the CBO on economic stimulus earlier in the year, cutting the corporate tax was found to have little economic benefit ("
The most common form of a general cut in business taxes is a reduction in the corporate tax rate. This approach, however, is not a particularly cost-effective method of stimulating business spending: Increasing the after-tax income of businesses typically does not create an incentive for them to spend more on labor or to produce more, because production depends on the ability to sell output.") so this is useless too.
And eliminating the "death" tax? Double LOL on this one. The inheritance tax only affects a teeny tiny group of individuals, almost none of which (
literally a fraction of a percent) are small businesses.
This is just more of the same discredited nonsense.
