Bad Journalism and Bad Math

CNBC is attempting to sex up Hillary's anti-1% credentials, but I can't help laugh at the semantic construction...

A study from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that Clinton's plan would generate $1 trillion in additional revenue for the government over the first decade and an additional $2 trillion over the next 20 years.

That is the exact same as saying the plan would raise $100 billion per year for 30 years.  But "trillions" sounds better in terms of soaking the rich.  $100 billion isn't big at all.  In fact, the government runs a structural $400-500 billion deficit even after heroic efforts by the GOP congress to rein in Obama's typical $1 trillion deficits.  So what HRC is proposing is pretty silly, especially when you consider that revenue coming in far in the future.  Discount that revenue by historically typical interest rates and the net present value is half of that.  Add in that everything that the government would spend that money on will be more expensive due to inflation, and these numbers are REALLY underwhelming.