What does Kamala want? Free stuff!
How’s she gonna pay for it? Well…she doesn’t seem to know.
The Democrat presidential nominee spent the better part of the end of last week rolling out a series of expensive economic proposals like an episode of Oprah's Favorite Things to try and rake in votes in November, including promises to cancel billions more in student loan debt, wipe the slate on billions more in medical debt, hand out $25,000 in taxpayer funded “assistance” for up to four million first-time homebuyers, and pay for people’s child care.
The total price tag for all of which would easily land in the hundreds of billions, if not the trillions (one estimate has it at about $1.7 trillion, altogether) — all born, of course, by the U.S. taxpayer. So one might make the assumption that Harris has an idea of how she’d pay for all of it.
Turns out, she’s not really sure. When asked how she’d come up with the cash to fund all the “free” stuff she wants to hand out willy-nilly, the VP rolled out a longwinded response that never really seemed to get around to an answer.
Related: Harris to Propose $25,000 Tax-Funded 'Assistance' for First-Time Homeowners
“Can you explain how you’re gonna pay for those?” a reporter bluntly asked Harris during a campaign stop in the swing state of Pennsylvania.
“You just look at it tin terms of what we’re talking about for example around children, and the child tax credit, and extending the [Earned income tax credit],” Harris said, referring to her plan to give up to $6,000 in tax credits for (certain) families with newborns.
Kamala is asked how she'll pay for all of the handouts she's promising...
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) August 18, 2024
After long-winded word salad, she doesn't come up with an answer.
She thinks Americans are stupid. pic.twitter.com/BestltGp5R
She then cited “the return on that investment in terms of what that will do and what it will pay for” as a way to pay for the program, without actually explaining what “return on investment” she’s talking about or how the proposal would be self-funding.
She then claimed that her multi-trillion-dollar proposal would “pay for itself” because it’s focused on “bettering communities.”
Of course, if it were true that all these government programs wind up “paying for themselves,” we wouldn’t be $35 trillion in debt and running a $1.5 trillion deficit.