They haven't a clue. That means, they could be backing a candidate that makes Obama and Trump look like amateurs when it comes to spending. Surely they need to know.
The corporations that are now permanently saving billions and the individuals that are saving millions are pleased you are satisfied with your temporary 2 grand.
Doubtless having those 2 grand spent by leftist governments on free health insurance, education and subsidized housing for illegals would be the best and most satisfying use of my money. Oh and Climate hoax cultists want a chunk of my tax dollar as well, those old failing models need to be urgently replaced with new failing models or we will all die in 12 years, lest we forget the all important financial needs of government bureaucrats implementing these amazingly satisfying programs on my family's behalf.
I don’t believe illegals should be given a cent but we have the ability to make the lives of American’s better and more prosperous by using various economies of scale because conservatives are terrified of “socialism”. As for “climate change”, we definitely need to tackle pollution as quickly as possible but I don’t think there is much we can do with the naturally occurring climate changes we are seeing. Quoting a single extremist doesn't really make your point however.
Good for you to be a moderate Democrat. Not good for you to be oblivious to what the Dem party has become. Every presidential candidate voted for healthcare for illegals, just about all of them are on record demanding the abolishment of ICE. Same goes for the Climate hoax and green new deal... Don't give me your "single extremist" nonsense, it's the majority of the Dem party and its leadership that has completely lost control of the woke rabble.
I don’t like the democrats in general — but trump is toxic and anti what this country should stand for. As for the ICE issue and healthcare for illegals issues, it is in neither of the two candidates I support platform. Very few people have ever said the world will end in 12 years — even less actually believe it. Why do you hold views of single members of the democrat party accountable to the entire party while not doing the same for republicans it just makes you seem... disingenuous... to everyone that doesn’t have a “team”.
How is Trump toxic for America? Can you give a specific list and a link to a site that stipulates the toxic criteria please. I'm from the UK, Trump seems to put America first but Obama didn't. I'm surprised you didn't notice that.
You don't think those are examples of toxic behavior? For the president of the united states. If you feel people like trump are the grown ups I can see why you are comfused.
Both sides spend like thieves with a stolen credit card. As long as Americans fight among each other, they will enjoy consequence-free irresponsibility.
A list, not pictures. Can you please link to a study from a university etc.. that has devised such a criteria?
32 trillion over a decade for Medicare for all. 38 trillion a decade for universal income. 47 billion a year for college plus 1.5 trillion to eliminate student loan debt. 90 trillion isn't that far off only 3 new democrats proposed bills.
No, all the universities and polls say the man mocking handicap people and threatening Americans with violence is the best thing for America. Totally not toxic Totally cool
Here's the funny thing: https://www.theatlantic.com/politic...warren-and-sanderss-single-payer-plan/600166/ IF THEY DO ALL OF THIS FOR ONLY MEDICARE FOR ALL PLAN: - How big a lift is it to raise $32 trillion? It’s almost 50 percent more than the total revenue the CBO projects Washington will collect from the personal income tax over the next decade (about $23.3 trillion). It’s more than double the amount the CBO projects Washington will collect over the next decade from the payroll tax that funds Social Security and part of Medicare (about $15.4 trillion). A $32 trillion tax increase would represent just over two-thirds of the revenue the CBO projects the federal government will collect from all sources over the next decade (just over $46 trillion.) - her proposed wealth tax on personal fortunes exceeding $50 million would raise just $2.75 trillion over the next decade - Repealing the tax cuts for businesses and individuals that President Donald Trump and the GOP Congress passed in late 2017 would similarly raise about $2 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade. - Democrats have proposed for years to eliminate the current cap on the payroll tax—which stops taxing income above about $133,000—and instead impose the tax on all income above a higher threshold, such as $250,000. The CBO recently estimated that such a plan would raise about $1.2 trillion over the next decade, again a small share of single payer’s cost - raising the top income-tax rate past 50 percent and ending reduced taxation for capital gains—would likely cover about half of the proposal’s cost. You would STILL NEED A VAT OF 25%+ - value-added tax—a sort of national sales tax that many European nations use to fund their social safety net—the rate would likely need to be set at about 25 percent, he estimated. THESE PEOPLE ARE OUT OF THEIR FRIGGING MINDS.
I highlighted the key word in your claim. The 32T estimate for healthcare is the highest estimated cost by a conservative foundation — and doesn’t include savings No one is proposing UBI for all Americans, it would be phased out after certain income levels The “free” college would be paid for with a speculative tax on trades — so a net zero cost Not to mention those are the most extreme examples at the highest cost possible and zero of them have the possibility of becoming law. And none of them count realized or potential savings
I was using copious amounts of sarcasm there Although, now that we are in the Twilight Zone, I understand how it's hard to recognize now.
Removing all deductibles and premiums would save around 40 Billion (per month) or 4.8T over ten years. Just adding that to your figures above brings the amount to 26.75T and doesn’t include cost saving from lowered medical and administrative fees. Also the 32T is the highest figure for the program from a conservative think tank. Excluding veterans as they are a totally separate program — if we consolidate that it adds another 2T to the budget. We can also remove what states contribute for their citizens, or another 7T. Most analysts have put the total cost much lower especially if we keep co-pays Looks like a surplus situation to me... Even on the extreme end of the spectrum 35.75T > 32T