Hayes Brown Examines Difference Between Economic Policies
A recent MSNBC opinion piece titled “The biggest difference between Trump’s and Harris’ economic pitches” aimed to highlight the contrasting approaches of Donald Trump and Kamala Harris when it comes to the economy.
However, instead of drawing a meaningful contrast, the article seemed to miss its own point. According to the piece, Trump is focused on "big-picture" macroeconomics, while Harris presents a more "microeconomic" approach with targeted policies.
However, labeling a presidential candidate as "obsessed" with macroeconomic issues like inflation, wages, and interest rates is hardly a criticism. In fact, these are exactly the issues American voters are concerned about. The Biden-Harris administration’s inability to tackle these pressing matters has resulted in rising inflation, stagnant real wages, crippling interest rates, and a federal deficit that’s ballooned out of control. Harris, by endorsing Bidenomics, has effectively embraced the very economic plan that has caused these problems.
While Harris’s so-called microeconomic pitch focuses on offering targeted relief—like attacking price gouging or providing grants for first-time homebuyers—these efforts feel more like short-term Band-Aids than a comprehensive solution.
She seems to be plugging holes in a sinking ship rather than fixing the ship itself. Her proposals, such as forgiving loans or expanding Medicare, might temporarily alleviate the pain for certain groups, but they don't address the systemic problems in the economy at large.
One of the more puzzling aspects of Harris’s campaign is her approach to winning over Black male voters, a group that’s increasingly shifting toward Trump. Harris’s "Opportunity Agenda for Black Men," which includes forgivable loans for Black entrepreneurs and promises of new opportunities in the recreational marijuana industry, feels more like political pandering than genuine economic reform.
Offering "free money" and the legalization of marijuana as solutions to economic inequality seems out of touch with what many Black voters are actually seeking—jobs, better wages, and more opportunities for upward mobility. Trump, on the other hand, is offering policies that aim to grow the economy for all Americans, including tax cuts and deregulation that, during his first term, led to real wage increases and historically low unemployment rates for minorities.
In trying to downplay Trump’s macroeconomic strategy, the MSNBC piece dismisses some of his key proposals as "pandering," such as ending taxes on overtime pay. Yet, this policy and others—like cutting taxes on tips and Social Security benefits—are grounded in Trump’s broader economic philosophy of incentivizing hard work and putting more money back into the hands of everyday Americans. These are policies that transcend race and gender, designed to benefit anyone who works hard, regardless of their background.
The MSNBC article also takes aim at Trump’s trade policies, particularly his use of tariffs. Yet, if tariffs are such a harmful economic tool, why has the Biden-Harris administration kept many of Trump’s tariffs in place and even increased them?
Recent tariff hikes on critical industries like electric vehicles and semiconductor chips suggest that, despite their public criticisms, the current administration understands the strategic importance of protecting U.S. industries from unfair foreign competition.