My taxes went up after the 2017 Trump?Republican tax give-away to the rich and corporation….
Donald Trump is working to raise my taxes again with his trade war import tax hike…
Now me?
A Democrat is saturated with people that want me vote for HUGE programs that would raise my taxes even MORE?
The Democratic presidential contenders are ready to break the bank with expensive policy proposals that would add trillions of dollars to the deficit if enacted.
The 2020 hopefuls are angling to one-up each other with big policy ideas that would overhaul the U.S. health care system, address climate change and provide free college tuition or erase student debt.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee’s “Global Climate Mobilization” plan, hailed by environmental activists as the gold standard, would cost the U.S. government $3 trillion over the next decade.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s (Mass.) proposal to eliminate tuition at public colleges and erase existing student debt carries a $1.25 trillion price tag.
And Sen. Bernie Sanders’s (I-Vt.) “Medicare for All” bill, cosponsored by four other 2020 Democrats, would require $32 trillion in government spending, according to one study.
The Democrats have proposed a raft of smaller plans as well, such as Sen. Kamala Harris’s (Calif.) plan to raise teacher pay or Sen. Cory Booker’s (N.J.) proposal to make rent more affordable through housing credits, both of which reach into the hundreds of billions.
In many cases, the Democrats are explaining how they’d pay for the plans, either by rolling back the GOP’s tax cuts, levying new taxes on the wealthiest Americans or eliminating corporate subsidies.
They also argue that the changes they seek will in some cases pay for themselves, either by lowering the cost of health care and drug prices, creating new green jobs or unlocking private sector investments.
But the torrent of expensive policy proposals has drawn criticism from some Democrats, including several 2020 contenders, who warn that the “massive government expansions” will scare off swing voters….
Glad to answer your question.
Progressives have made it clear that the wealthy will pay for the programs. The NY Times has found that the top 1% in the US own more wealth than the bottom 90% combined. And there are programs that could easily cut 100s billions of dollars from the military from which we receive little benefit. And we can replace private health insurance with government insurance as private insurance programs are incredibly inefficiently designed – and they often just encourage the doctors to require msny doctor visits and prescribe opioids that might not be needed but lined their pockets. With regard to payments for education, in the long term they pay for themselves as most educated workers pay much higher taxes.
Lastly, I would add that even in the optimistic scenario with s progressive in the White House and Democrats winning the Senatr, the ambitious plans of progressives will be greatly scaled down. There’s no realistic chance of free college in the near future, but if you ask for little, you get less, so it is better to propose ambitious goals.
Most of Sanders and Warren’s programs have NO CHANCE of passage….
Neither does Biden’s Climate Change…
I agree that just putting them out there is good , but not realistic….
But that is normal for ALL politicians….
The issue is the Progressives claim they will make their choices based on something that ain’t gonna happen to possibly ace out a person that CAN beat Trump….
Good ideology …But plain stupid in the long game…
Voted for YOUR person….
Felt Good….
Donald Trump gets a second term?
HTF was THAT SMART?
James, I don’t really care if you think my comments are stupid Because you often don’t understand them.
But you should know that relative to others, Biden polls significantly better in the Democratic field among the uneducated than he does among the well-educated. So there are a lot of smart people making very different decisions than you. And progressives dislike Trump too.
And stop with this bs that you want to beat Trump more than me. If you did believe that, you wouldn’t be attacking progressives as aggressively as you do, when they have at least a 50% chance at winning the nomination. And lastly, it is far from obvious that Biden is the candidate most likely to beat Trump over a year from now. There is a good reason why he failed miserably in his past presidential runs. Hopeful, he is a better candidate now, but that is not obvious to me.
I’m not going to keep replying to your comments when you don’t even address anything I say. But have it your way.
Relax Z….
My comment about Biden is something I see as good math…
SO FAR?
Joe Biden beats EVERYBODY…..
Democrats AND Trump….
I and a LOT of others want a WINNER….
PERIOD!
I understand you and others I have talked to are about policies FIRST….
Good…
I want to win…
To win means I would pick the person that seems to be the best bet….
For ME…
That’s ole Joe Biden…
Polling less than a year and half out seems to confirm it…
Let the primaries play out…..
If it’s Biden?
We’ll know by March 3rd, Super Tuesday
Yup he failed before…
Ya learn from your mistakes…
(Trump has failed miserably in business and is doing the same as President…Biden can do BETTER)
I’m old enough to remember when there was no tuition for in-state residents at state (and city) colleges and universities, although “non-academic” fees were slowly climbing.
Instituting tuition at the University of California was hotly contested in 1970.
So, although paying for it is a legitimate question, it’s far from an exotic idea.
[ There is, however, an argument about social fairness, since college grads earn so much more over their lives than those who never entered (or completed) college but who may still be contributing taxes to the college educations of their future superiors. So, (1) free further education, e.g. at junior colleges, for crafts and vocations should be available on an equal basis, (2) there might be a Swedish-style system of paying back tuition over graduates’ careers on a progressive income-based scale, and (3) it should be recognized that a bachelor’s degree has often become necessary for modest and starter jobs that once only required only a high-school diploma. ]
Nor is some form of Medicare for All, which every other advanced nation has had in some form for decades, exotic or far-fetched. What’s strange is how long it took the U.S. to even approach it (more than half a century after Canada Care started and 65 years after Britain’s National Health Service.
I wouldn’t object to the approach of more-moderate Democratic candidates to start with a real Public Option in every state and commonwealth. Private insurers (e.g. the HIAA) complained successfully last time that a public entity would compete unfairly with those that must earn profits for their investors. But unless the dice are overloaded one way or another, who (besides the shareholders and executives), who cares?
Those who do actually prefer their existing (partly employer-funded) private insurance plans, with all the co-pays and deductibles, should be allowed to keep them. But they should not be the only choice under Affordable Care.
France, and I understand Germany, requires workers and employers to sign up with one of about four non-profit cooperative plans, and there has long been a non-government plan., the British United Provident Association, for those willing to pay the extra cost in exchange for nicer hospitals and clinics.
In 2009, Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) and other needed Democratic Senators who were on the fence, forced the Obama administration to drop a requirement for a public option under ACA. One of the arguments was that several private insurers competing in each state would force each other to keep rates down and service high. But most states have at most two insurers competing, and there has been little consequent control of drug prices, hospital expansion, needless arms-race competition and centralization away from rural areas as ever bigger nonprofit and for-profit metropolitan hospitals absorb and replace local hospitals.
I just question PAYING for ‘Free’ education and healthcare…
We here in America are NEVER. Going back to the high tax the rich thing that existed during Ronald Regan’s era….
So dropping the cost on us middle class folks won’t work even for most Democrats…