During his campaign, Donald Trump said his policies would grow the economy by 4 percent per year and increase employment by 25 million over the next decade. While these are laudable goals, they also seem unlikely to be achieved.

To understand the difficulty of achieving 4 percent growth, we need to review our economic history. The American economy has not grown by 4 percent since the early 1970s. The last time the United States enjoyed even 3.5 percent growth occurred during the technological boom of the late 1990s and early 2000s.

The Congressional Budget Office — a non-partisan think tank — forecasts only a 1.97 percent growth over the next decade.

To employ 25 million more people over the next decade seems impossible, given the country’s current demographics.

According to the Department of Labor’s Bureau of Statistics, approximately 124 million people were employed and 7.5 million were unemployed — which counts only people who are looking for work — in December 2016. We cannot possibly add 25 million workers unless more people enter the workforce. The Department of Labor estimates that only 63 percent of Americans are participating in our labor force, but we cannot expect this number to increase much above its previous high of 67 percent recorded in January 2000.

The aging of the U.S. population is another hurdle constraining employment growth, because it lowers the labor participation rate. Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are retiring every day, on average. If the workforce declines, we need our workers to become more productive. Specifically, productivity growth would need to increase from 1.5 percent to 2.6 percent, according to an article, “Don’t Count on 4 percent Growth,” by the Committee for Responsible Federal Budget.

Trump’s policies to reduce immigration will retard growth, given the low fertility rate of our native population. Currently, according to the Census Bureau, the fertility rate is 1.84 children per woman. To maintain our current population, you either need 2.1 children per woman or you need people to move here.

Trump has advocated several pro-growth policies:

1. Spending $1 trillion on infrastructure. Both political parties advocate major infrastructure expenditures. Senate Democrats, for instance, unveiled their plan calling for $180 billion to improve rail and bus systems, $65 billion for seaports, $110 billion for water and sewer systems and $100 billion for energy infrastructure.

2. Reducing personal and business taxes. Trump has advocated lowering the corporate tax from 35 percent to 15 percent and reducing the top tax bracket from 39.6 percent to 33 percent. These tax reductions, he says, would encourage more business investment and more personal consumption.

3. Lowering corporate taxes to encourage companies to repatriate some $2.5 trillion in cash they now hold overseas to avoid paying U.S. taxes. S&P Global estimated that if 15 percent of the repatriated cash went into infrastructure projects, America would add slightly over 300,000 jobs.

4. Reducing burdensome government regulations.

5. Initiating energy reforms that include more permits for coal mining and oil drilling, and approving pipeline construction.

At the same time, factors exist that could reduce growth.

The Federal Reserve would likely take steps such a raising interest rates to dampen growth if its policymakers felt the economy was overheating, if inflation increased significantly above 2 percent or if the federal deficit expanded significantly. By some estimates, Trump’s tax plan could expand our deficit by as much as $6 trillion.

By nature, I am an optimist who roots ardently for the home team. I would like to give the new administration’s economic plan my blessings.

Historically, there are two major factors that drive economic growth — population growth and technological innovation.

America is benefitting from technological innovation. Hopefully, some of these scientific breakthroughs, such as the wider use of drones, solar power and robots, can jumpstart our economy.

To sustain long-term growth, America needs to facilitate labor force participation by providing lifetime educational programs, to remove impediments to the efficient allocation of resources, to encourage competition and to reward innovation.

Originally published in the Sarasota Herald-Tribune