If you’re able to think past President-elect Donald Trump’s nasty campaign bluster (we hear yoga and kitten videos help), you’ll discover something soothing, even exciting in his electioneering promises to create jobs: Elements of his economic plan could boost growth and standards of living here and nationwide.

This is potentially good news for millions of jobs-starved Americans.

There are huge caveats. Trump has not been good on details, he’s a serial exaggerator, and he’s completely out to sea in his insistence that America has the option to unplug from global trade. He also pays little heed to the nation’s $20 trillion debt, the looming threat of Social Security insolvency and Medicare’s unsustainable cost trajectory.

If Trump ignores America’s glaring balance sheet woes during his presidency, things will go badly for the country. But Trump, unlike President Barack Obama, is a business guy and deal-maker at heart, and the country could benefit from having that perspective in the White House.

Trump is a real estate developer who views the American economy as a fixer-upper: It requires work but has great bones. His overall approach is free market-focused and pro-growth. Parts dovetail nicely with traditional Republican principles. So his job-creation philosophy is both sound and potentially doable since the Republican Party will control both houses of Congress. Expect negotiations on the details, though.

One prong of the strategy has the direct potential to encourage business investment, and therefore hiring: Trump would cut business taxes, with the corporate rate dropping from 35 percent to 15 percent. Many Democrats acknowledge that the current high rate puts US businesses at a disadvantage. Fixing that could lead some big corporations to stay onshore or move here, rather than base themselves in countries with lower taxes.

He also proposes offering a one-time deal to American multinationals to entice them to bring home some of the estimated $2.6 trillion in profits they have parked overseas. That money sits (and works) abroad because if it were returned now it would be hit with the 35 percent rate. Trump would allow repatriation at a 10 percent rate. Companies could use the money in various ways, including investing in their businesses here, while the Trump administration could put the revenue windfall to work on bridge repairs, airport projects and other public works that create construction jobs.

Another Trump priority: reducing onerous federal regulations that hold back business activity. In Washington there are buildings full of agencies churning out reams of rules and requirements that needlessly constrain job creation.

“In the regulatory agencies, getting rid of the Obama people and putting in people who are not anti-business will have a huge impact,” Stephen Moore, an economic adviser to Trump, tells us. Yes, that’s a partisan talking. And no, we’re not naive. We don’t advocate shutting down environmental, financial and other valuable layers of oversight. But we’ve also seen enough dumb rules enacted -- and good business proposals nixed -- to know that the path to greater US job growth is more likely to wind through a boss’ office than a regulator’s.

In the energy industry, for example, we argued that it was a mistake for the Obama administration to kill the 1,931-kilometer Keystone XL oil pipeline.

Approval has been hung up for years over environmental concerns that do not withstand scrutiny. One overriding truth: It’s more dangerous to transport oil by rail or truck than by pipeline. Trump seems inclined to approve the deal, an $8 billion investment by a Canadian company in the Great Plains, and in true deal-maker fashion suggests he’d like “a piece of the profits” for US taxpayers.

We part paths with the president-elect on some issues. The country needs to clean the skies to fight climate change, so we can’t see reinvigorating the coal industry, as Trump does. Also, as noted above, global trade deals are good for US businesses, consumers and millions of workers.

Yes, Republicans and Democrats will have to hash out their practical and philosophical differences. But when the starting point of a conversation in Washington is debating whose ideas for job creation are better, it will be a good day for everyone.

(Tribune Content Agency/Chicago Tribune)
Editorial