Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search

Democratic Primaries
In reply to the discussion: The Gauzy Myth of the Sanders Campaign [View all]Gothmog
(166,868 posts)30. LOL-the real world is a nice place and sanders cannot pay for his program in the real world
sanders has attempted to introduce this plan and has failed because he cannot pay for his plan in the real world. Such a plan in theory may generate societal savings but such savings would not pay for a program. Governments can only spend tax revenues and/or borrowings. This study does not say how one would pay for such a program in the real world. I note that Prof. Krugman like the concepts of such a plan in theory but notes that taxes will have to be raised a great deal to pay for such a plan
Back in 2016, here is his position Prof. Krugman compares Sanders hoped for health care savings to the GOP tax cuts. http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/weakened-at-bernies/?_r=0
On health care: leave on one side the virtual impossibility of achieving single-payer. Beyond the politics, the Sanders plan isnt just lacking in detail; as Ezra Klein notes, it both promises more comprehensive coverage than Medicare or for that matter single-payer systems in other countries, and assumes huge cost savings that are at best unlikely given that kind of generosity. This lets Sanders claim that he could make it work with much lower middle-class taxes than would probably be needed in practice.
To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich and single-payer really does save money, whereas theres no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, its not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.
To be harsh but accurate: the Sanders health plan looks a little bit like a standard Republican tax-cut plan, which relies on fantasies about huge supply-side effects to make the numbers supposedly add up. Only a little bit: after all, this is a plan seeking to provide health care, not lavish windfalls on the rich and single-payer really does save money, whereas theres no evidence that tax cuts deliver growth. Still, its not the kind of brave truth-telling the Sanders campaign pitch might have led you to expect.
Today, Prof. Krugman says that such a plan is feasible if you are willing to pay a great deal more in taxes
https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/paul-krugman-explains-why-single-payer-health-care-entirely-achievable-us-and-how
If we went to government provision of all insurance, wed pay more in taxes but less in premiums, and the overall burden of health spending would probably fall, because single-payer systems tend to be cheaper than market-based."
The amount of higher taxes are not quantified in this article by Krugman. To pay for any such plan will require massive tax hikes
Again sanders has utterly failed in his attempts to get Vermont to adopt his magical single payer plan because the state of Vermont cannot use hypothetical societal saving to pay for this plan. Even Krugman admits that much higher taxes are needed

primary today, I would vote for: Joe Biden
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
40 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations

Exactly. They want to call it communism, but is it that much different than The New Deal?
rickyhall
Mar 2020
#13
Yup. How could we take him seriously as a candidate? How naive, if not outright foolish
KPN
Mar 2020
#16
Democrats seem to be more objective and vote for proven performance, Joe had that imperfectly in
uponit7771
Mar 2020
#23
Sanders' agenda: Its cost -- possibly $60 trillion -- would set a peacetime US record - CNNPolitics
Gothmog
Mar 2020
#22
LOL-the real world is a nice place and sanders cannot pay for his program in the real world
Gothmog
Mar 2020
#30
Cool, ok, so the talking-past-repliers behavior is not an exception but is your rule
ramen
Mar 2020
#36
sanders ad was rated false and is bogus given sanders proposed Social Security cuts
Gothmog
Mar 2020
#40