2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy was it ok for Obama to Raise Taxes and Not Sanders?
Obama raised taxes by letting the Bush Tax cuts expire (which I agree was a good thing).
He also raised taxes with the implementation of Obamacare (again, which I agree is a good thing).
Why is it not ok for Sanders to suggest paying for something that will save everyone more money than the increase in taxes they'd pay. The only people expected to pay more than they would gain from the programs are the 1%. Everyone else has a net benefit.
Why do Democrats want to use Republican Talking Points against Sanders?
kennetha
(3,666 posts)and not just on the top 1%.
Tax increases with no precedent in recent history. tough sell.
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)He's published his numbers on this. Anyone not in the top 1% would have a net financial gain. Spin away with camp weathervane if you like, that doesn't make you right (er, correct, it might push you to the right though).
DanTex
(20,709 posts)berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Granted, it's not Sander's plan, but Sander's plan would save even more since there was still profit in the AmeriCare plan.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Sanders' numbers work out. It's not just one person saying this, it's pretty much everyone who has looked at it, including proponents of single payer like Krugman.
Here's another study that came out today.
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/28/10858644/bernie-sanders-kenneth-thorpe-single-payer
berni_mccoy
(23,018 posts)Services.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Might as well check an astrological chart.
Response to DanTex (Reply #4)
Ed Suspicious This message was self-deleted by its author.
angrychair
(8,593 posts)So 210 economist opinion on $15/hr wage increase were wrong?
http://www.budget.senate.gov/democratic/public/index.cfm/2015/7/top-economists-are-backing-sen-bernie-sanders-on-establishing-a-15-an-hour-minimum-wage
170 economist are wrong on Wall St reform?:
http://usuncut.com/politics/170-top-economists-back-bernie-sanders-plan-to-rein-in-wall-street/
The world renowned economist, Gerald Friedman, who was the basis for the infamous WSJ hit piece on Sanders healthcare plan's cost actually wrote an open letter stating that Sanders plan would save the country $5 trillion over that 10 year period, after counting the $18 trillion price tag over that 10 year petiod:
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/the-wall-street-journal-k_b_8143062.html
So, I believe these people are not in a "Bernie bubble" and know what they are talking about.
DanTex
(20,709 posts)Friedman is, but he's basically standing alone among experts in vouching for the plan. Here's another study that came out today.
http://www.vox.com/2016/1/28/10858644/bernie-sanders-kenneth-thorpe-single-payer
frylock
(34,825 posts)hedda_foil
(16,368 posts)one_voice
(20,043 posts)your first example was done because the repukes wouldn't extend unemployment unless he did that. They put him in a terrible position. I wasn't happy at all with it.
I'm not sure your first example is a fair one. I'd have to look it up to see if I'm right.
I'm not against raising taxes for single payer--as long as it has prescription coverage & dental (eventually). I don't know if campaigning on raising taxes is a good idea. I understand the concept but a lot of people won't
If he is our nominee he's going to be beat to death with it. Many people still think the economy is in the shitter. They tune out after hearing raise taxes.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)elias49
(4,259 posts)Let's not be blind here.
Either that or we remain mired in the misery of the lowest wages in decades.
Or millions of children not eating.
Or more drain on my 401K.
More war in the Middle East.
War with Russia.
More ass-kissing with the Saudis.
I'm so done with the incremental death of the working and middle classes.
Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)frazzled
(18,402 posts)raising the taxes only on the wealthy, but leaving them in place for the middle class (as you recall, that was a result of the infamous budget deal that most here objected to, wanting all the cuts to be expired):
$453 billion over ten years comes from the expiration of cuts to the income, capital gains, and dividend tax rates for filers with taxable income above $450,000 for married couples and $400,000 for singles. These filers retain the full Bush tax-rate cuts on their first $450,000 (or $400,000) of taxable income. (Note: the taxable income thresholds of $400,000 and $450,000 translate into significantly higher threshold amounts for adjusted gross income that is, the income before taxpayers take advantage of the credits, deductions, and other tax preferences to which theyre entitled.)
$152 billion comes from allowing limits on personal exemptions and itemized deductions (the so-called Pease and PEP provisions) to return for filers with adjusted gross income above $300,000 for married couples and $250,000 for singles.
$19 billion comes from raising the estate tax rate to 40 percent, from the 35 percent rate in place in 2012. The exemption amount the value of an estate that is not subject to the estate tax will be $5.2 million for individuals and $10.4 million for couples in 2013, with the exemption amounts rising with inflation in future years. (By comparison, returning the estate tax to its 2009 parameters of 45 percent, with a $7 million per couple exemption, would have saved $137 billion; thus, relative to the 2009 parameters, $118 billion in revenue was lost.)
http://www.cbpp.org/research/budget-deal-makes-permanent-82-percent-of-president-bushs-tax-cuts
The only taxes on the lower and middle class he "raised" (according to Republicans, who like to call anything a tax hike) involved the payroll tax. Those were lowered by a percentage and a half or so at the beginning of his administration to stimulate the economy and help most people put a little money in their pockets to spend. When that temporary stimulus "cut" expired a few years later as the economy began recovery and in the interest of funding Social Security and Medicare, it was dubbed a "raise."
So don't go all repeating Republican drivel. Obama, largely because of the recession and slow recovery, did not raise taxes on the middle class.