...event of its kind in cable news history. That kind of surprised me. Her proposals surprised me too but in a good way.
Some of the ones I liked:
1. Medicare For All
2. $6000 refundable tax credit for poor and middle-class folks. You can even take the credit as an advance. The government would pay you $500 a month rather than refunding it to you at tax time if you prefer.
3. Green New Deal She endorsed this as it has been championed by AOC.
And where will the couple of trillion to pay for this come from?
Ouch ! ! ! Poor old DonDiego just felt a tug on his wallet pocket, . . .
Let's see, . . . hmm, Medicare for All, . . .
Senator Sanders and Representative Ocasio-Cortez reference a study from the Mercatus Center suggesting Medicare- for-All would save the American people $2 trillion over a 10 year period.
Hot Darn ! ! ! This is gonna be great !
However, the author of the study explains that is 'highly unlikely". The author had incorporated an estimate from Senator Sanders Bill advocating Medicare for All that Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursements would be roughly 40% lower than those paid by private insurers; the author explained within the study that he thought this to be "highly unlikely".
In fact in the report, the author provided an alternative-scenario estimate, one that assumed instead that payments to health care providers would “remain equal on average to the current-law blend of higher private and lower public reimbursement rates.” Under that scenario, there would be a net increase in health care spending over current projections.
Ref: Fact Check
So, . . . poor old DonDiego opines a tax increase will likely be required as well as additional deficit spending, . . . i.e. borrowing.
Ok, . . . what about that there $6000 refundable tax credit, . . .
" The LIFT-the-Middle-Class credits would reduce federal revenue by $2.7 trillion between 2019 and 2028 on a conventional basis."
Ref: Tax Foundation
Wait a minute ! ! ! This looks to poor old DonDiego like that money has got to be made up from tax increases and deficit spending.
Hmm, . . . tax increases and deficit spending. Whoda thunk it?
Sorry, tom. It looks like the American taxpayer is gonna pay for this stuff.
Want to know how to make a Republican understand how tax cuts do not pay for themselevs? Have a democrat propose one. Thank you, DonDIego!
DD's last sentence is correct. And thats the real difference between Democrats and Republicans isn't it? Democrats pay for their legiislation while REpublicans throw it on the debt and blame it on the Democrat that comes after them in office.
You could easily pay for Kamala Harris' tax cut by trading it in for the ridiculous ones given to corporations and the billionaire class handed out by Bush and Trump. Jamie DImon and Larry Kudlow will argue stock buybacks are a better way to grow the economy than direct spending by consumers. And i'll take the other side of that argument any day. And I would love nothing more than to see that debate happen between Donny Trust-fund and Kamala Harris.
With a couple of trillion in annual costs for these programs pj & company will have to come up with a better way to pay for this, other than the rich pay their fair share (whatever that means)
The subject of "paying for things" is best left to the people who do not subscribe to dynamic scoring.
The last Republican president who qualified had to resign his office amidst the Watergate scandal.
As a Medicare participant myself I have an observation or two for my far left friends here......the impression many have is that Medicare is free......it's a lot of things but free isn't one of them. Who pays and how much? She indicates that ALL insurance plans will go.....does that include government plans, specifically Congressional plans? Or is this another plan where the "leaders" are exempt?
Interestingly, the leftist press never seems to ask these types of questions.
Oopsi ! Poor old DonDiego forgot to address the Green New Deal.
OK, the GND is a lot of stuff, . . . like, . . .
__ getting all the nation's electricity from renewable sources within 10 years; coal, natural gas, oil, and nuclear power are thereafter forbidden. Hydropower is not addressed, but the proposal does not like the fact that dams spoil the landscape.
__ construction of a "smart electrical grid".
__ oh, and a massive effort to upgrade to energy-efficient buildings.
__ and the New Green deal also guarantees jobs for unemployed people who want them - no mention of competence required.
No cost estimates are available for the entire plan, . . . but one back-of-the-envelope calculation building the generating capacity alone would run at least $2-trillion. This doesn't even consider things like storage of "power" since wind and solar can be intermittent or any other practical impediments.
So how much will all this cost ? Who knows ? It's not a real proposal from somebody who knows what she is talking about. It's a dream list thrown into the public square to make people feel good about, . . . well, . . . everything. And to make everyone dependent upon The Government for everything.
Sorry, tom. It looks like the American taxpayer is gonna pay for this stuff.
Unlike “invaders from El Salvador” climate change is a legitimate threat to the security of the United States. This fact is largely known to the general population but not to those who think they understand climate science better than climate scientists.
the costs of proactively addressing the climate threat dwarf those attributed to retroactively dealing with the consequences. Not my opinion. That’s the official UNited States government’s opinion as derived from their own research. ..Government report
So the fiscally responsible path would be to pursue the least costly solution. And since Democrats largely think scientists understand this threat better than Sean Hannity I think that gives them a leg up on addressing the issue over their counterparts, the Republicans.
For years we have been hearing about global cooling, then global warming & now climate change, whatever that means since the planet's climate has been changing for billions of years.
Remember gore's hockey stick; that didn't happen. Remember when gore said we had 10 years to save the planet. That came and went. Now we have Crazy Cortez, who says we have 12 years left. The only thing that has been consistent on these projections is how wrong they are.
And here is a snippet on how cheap "green" electricity is
Georgetown, Texas is a town of about 70,000 residents north of Austin. In 2012, the city committed to moving its energy grid to 100% renewables, a combination of wind and solar. When Georgetown committed to renewables it bought enough that it could cover peak summer usage plus a little extra for future population growth. It locked in 2012 prices by committing to long term contracts of up to 25 years. Of course, it wouldn’t need all of that power most of the year so the plan was to sell the excess to others on the Texas power grid who, it was thought, would be paying much higher prices for electricity produced from fossil fuels. Instead of lower electrical costs, Georgetown residents have seen the electrical costs go up by over $1,000
