How Bernie Sanders pays for his proposals

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: tothetenthpower

The ones that his staff says does not accept money from but he does not tell them to not run the ads. The largest is a Nursing Union.

You do realize he has no control over that right?

Why would he interfere in citizens getting together trying to get him elected?

That bit of criticism doesn't make any sense.

~Tenth

a reply to: Swills

Chasing tax evaders? People who are not going to pay and lawyer up anyway. Sounds great that you are trying to stick it to the man but how about lowering my taxes? Do not give everyone free #. Make them work for it. You know, like in the 50's.

Take a look at the amount of debt per taxpayer...and they want a trillion more? 154,000 per taxpayer.....

www.forbes.com...

In 2004, the federal debt was $7.3 trillion. This rose to $10 trillion when the housing bubble burst four years later. Today it exceeds $18 trillion and is projected to approach $21 trillion by 2019.

a reply to: Snarl

That much is certain, but I'd like a leader who screws the system up for me less rather than more.

a reply to: abe froman
Bingo! You sir have won a cigar!

a reply to: tothetenthpower

He can reject it. It is easy. You say don't do that. If you allow it to happen you will eventually have to pay the piper. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

a reply to: Gumerk

a reply to: Gumerk

I am not American nor do I have the time for making calculations/estimates of my own on all these matters, although I do believe too many people tend to look at the short-term losses rather than long-term gains. Another problem lies in the fact that too many people do not see the difference between social democracy and socialism or communism. Coming from a former USSR communistic country, which currently does have one of the best public education systems in the world, universal healthcare, 3 years paid parental leave, free-of-charge public transport (in capital), free universities and many other benefits and besides all these benefits (and many more) very high entrepreneurship rate as well as fully-functioning free market in other sectors. The current government debt is one of the lowest in OECD (around 10% debt-to-GDP), I would say that knowing what communism and socialism are, social democracy is nothing like that and positive for the whole society.

All of these proposals could work, they could not. Yet when looking at long-term these would make America stronger and decrease the government debt.

Universal healthcare: People in full health are more productive and are able to produce more than people who do not have the funds to do general doctor check-up. Being one illness away from bankruptcy creates enormous pressure inside and too often leads to addition health issues, both mental and physical, which decrease the productivity even more. None of us is protected from a serious health issue, whether we do everything that is supposed to prevent it or not, also we never know whether the for-profit insurance company would try to find a way to screw us over or not. In long-term healthier society would lead to higher productivity, higher salaries.

Free university: Considering the fact that in near future more and more jobs, especially in service sector as well as easier jobs will be taken over by robots (after all machine works at full productivity rate, is faster, can work 24/7 and so on). The economy is moving (already is) towards knowledge based economy. The country with the most scientist, the nation with the highest amount of educated people will succeed. Otherwise I can not even imagine what could happen. Another problem that we will encounter at some point is the fact that there are too many people who do not have the mental capacity to understand more complex problems, be able to do nothing else than the menial jobs, but that is another matter.

Proposals towards children/kids/youth: Children are the future. Childhood does affect every single one of us a lot. I personally believe the first years at least one parent should stay home with the children due to the fact that it does affect child development as well as psychological profile a lot. But well, that is not the proposal of him.

In the end, the more healthier, the more educated the nation is, the better it will do financially. All of these proposals would help in either health-wise or education-wise, which would add significant amount of money to the economy. People not having to pay back their loans on education or unfortunate illness would spend it elsewhere, which would be healthy for small businesses as well as bring in extra tax revenue. If minimum wage was equal or higher than living wage, that would significantly lower the amount of tax dollars spent on food stamps and other social security programs.


Despite not being American, I truly hope that Bernie would become the next president and be able to fulfil his promises. I truly believe that it would make the life of my US friends and every US person better, especially long-term (after all things do not happen overnight). If US would go down, every nation in Western hemisphere, probably in the world, would go down. I do not want it, I hope nobody wants it. So I hope for the best. From all the presidential candidates Bernie Sanders is the most sincere, having the most integrity, something that politicians rarely do have (especially Hillary, whose thoughts are only on the numbers of voters, beliefs/ideas changing based on what would bring more votes). I do believe someone has to take on Wall Street, the Greed, the hunger for money and Sanders is the guy who at least can bring strong attention towards that, which would be healthy for the economy, for the everyday people and make the life of an average American better.

As I have seen in social media: Feel the Bern

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: tothetenthpower

He can reject it. It is easy. You say don't do that. If you allow it to happen you will eventually have to pay the piper. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

What you just said makes no sense, and just sounds like talking points from Fox mashed together.

He has told some super PAC's to stop campaigning when they've gone rogue and promoted negative ads etc.

I mean...the dirt they have on Bernie, it's so minute, it's so little.

Oh gosh he hired friends and family?! Say it ain't so. Let's go back through 2o years of elections and find me a POTUS who didn't hire friends and family for their campaign.

Man people who don't like Bernie are really grasping at straws at this point. I almost wish there was a real scandal to taint my view of him for once.

~Tenth

originally posted by: Snarl
I'm digging on this Socialist math.

Let's see ... I'll 'try' to collect $100B ... and I'll spend $1T.

As long as I can sell that to the first few, the smart folks who come along asking where the other $900B is coming from will be drowned out by the cheering and fanfare.

I can feel the Bern. Can you?

Admittedly, it's kind of a misleading paragraph. If you dig into it, it's $1 trillion over five years. That's $200 billion per year. Pulling that $100 billion per year in new revenue would cover half the cost, the other half could come from secondary and tertiary tax revenue. The ripple effect of job creation. The paragraph also mentions 'other loopholes' as a source of revenue.

Potentially, it could run a deficit, but it wouldn't be on the magnitude of $900 billion.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Talking points from Fox. That is your rebuttal? You can do better than that.

Yes, the past 20 years where they have all done the same thing. You want that again? I don't. Reagan gave us a fresh start and 2 Bushes, a Clinton and an Obama later we are farked as a country. We cannot spend anymore.

They went rogue? Sorry, I started laughing thinking about Palin. Bottom line is he is pretending to look the other way and they are helping. A white supremacist group tries to campaign for Trump and he is called a bigot and a racist. He does not acknowledge them but they did have to change their name after a call from some lawyers. It is easy to say don't promote me.

It is not grasping at straws. I am simply pointing out what I have read in comparison to his book. He I am sure will sway a lot of people but he is a career 30 year politician who is a self proclaimed Socialist. I am not calling him one he is. I personally do not want that for my country .

We can all have an opinion right?

a reply to: matafuchs

The corrrrrrrrupt system we have now is out of control and I'll vote the person genuinely looking to curb it. Trump and Clinton ain't gonna do it, that's for sure.

Who you voting for?

a reply to: matafuchs

He's not rejecting them because they aren't Big Biz/wealthy funded Super Pacs as seen with just about every other candidate. They are a union of health care providers and he fully supports unions. Again, this is the best you got to demonize him?

www.msnbc.com...

“They are nurses and they are fighting for the health care of their people. They are doing what they think is appropriate. I do not have a super PAC,” he told CNN.

a reply to: Swills

I am writing in Mr T like I have since 1996. I pity da fool who don like his country...

a reply to: matafuchs

I could get behind that.

originally posted by: Snarl
LOL ... See what I mean. You think that money's gonna get taxed twice? Do you think the fat cat corps are gonna repeat a 'mistake'?

Yes, because tax losses to off shoring are 100 billion per year. Fixing that loophole will raise revenues by atleast 100 billion. Either it remains offshore but we still get the money, or it comes back into the country and we get it at our corporate tax rate.

So this proposal covers 100 billion/year or in CBO terms since they rate stuff on 10 year increments, 1 trillion of what he plans to spend. I'm pretty sure that's not the only revenue he's planning to get considering he wants to eliminate the deficit in addition to these programs.

Also, money does get taxed twice, it actually gets taxed more than that. Every time money changes hands it gets taxed, eventually the entire dollar is taken back in taxes. If you spend $100 billion to fix roads, those workers take $100 billion in their paychecks. 35% of that gets taxed away leaving $650 million. They spend that $650 million in the economy on local business, 7% of that disappears in sales taxes leaving 604.5 million. 16% of that goes to the payroll taxes of employees providing services leaving 520 million. Those workers then pay 35% on income leaving 338 million. We can keep going but the cycle should be obvious. Once a dollar changes hands 7 times it has been fully removed from the economy and everything taxed returns to the government.

originally posted by: Snarl
a reply to: ketsuko

No matter which party leader is picked, they're still not on 'our' side.

I think we oughta get SO to do a poll and see what % of ATS wants to get rid of all political threads until after the elections.

I am down for this. As much as I love explain why I'm right (or find out why I'm wrong in some cases) the political threads here really are just mind numbing. I could always just not read them (which I've done more and more often lately) but every thread involves politics to some extent, particularly the ones I find interesting.

So what is the plan if he can't pass a law?

a reply to: Aazadan

It would be stuck in litigation for decades. This is why they do it out there. I do not care about them going after offshore laundering.

We need real jobs. We need lower taxes. If you lower taxes you allow more take home that allows more to be pumped back into the economy.

Right now you pay about 28% of the your salary to income tax for the Federal Government. This is why they want to raise the minimum wage. To collect more taxes. They don't care about you and I mean the DNC and GOP. Bernie wants 15 bucks an hour and that would double the taxes collect in the US. Kiss my ass!

cnsnews.com...

The first 3 months of Fiscal Year 2016 the Federal Government collected 765 BILLION dollars. We could build a wall around every home in America with that. 5k per tax payer was collected on average.

You work for 75 cents on the dollar. Add Health care and it become about 60 cents per hour. How can someone survive. Don't tell me about a living wage, make a flat 10% tax across the board. If someone makes a ton of money they can still pay 10%, no exemptions, and they have more money to expand and hire more employees.

WAKE UP!!!! Only a person who could come back from nothing to 4 billion in the bank can do this.

originally posted by: ketsuko
And how quickly will those companies cease to become American companies and doing any business in America?

If they want to avoid paying, they will.

Hell most of those companies ceased being American companies going back to the Bush the father years.

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: abe froman

That's his plan, we get the money thru taxes, not loans. He's actually against the banks and I would wager against insane borrowing while also cutting back on expensive things like the Military Industrial Complex. After you finish reading this post the US just spent $250k on the Middle Eastern conflicts.

Yup and taxes will have to "necessarily skyrocket" to pay for it. Raising taxes at the top hurts the poor at the bottom, but i guess that's OK as long as they vote Democrat.

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Snarl

So let me get this straight. You would rather stick to a defeatist attitude then elect a commander in chief who would try to clean up the mess we're in.

Got it. Thanks for making your message clear.

The problem is you guys assume that Bernie's way is the only way.

originally posted by: Wardaddy454

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Snarl

So let me get this straight. You would rather stick to a defeatist attitude then elect a commander in chief who would try to clean up the mess we're in.

Got it. Thanks for making your message clear.

The problem is you guys assume that Bernie's way is the only way.

Perhaps, perhaps not, but I've yet to see anything of substance coming out of the Republican debates alot chest puffing and one upmanship, and I am not being dismissive from an ideological stance either, at least on the Democratic debates, we can see clear policy differences between the leading candidates.