There's also a website with a calculator to show how the plan would affect a variety of scenarios.
Last edited:
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Elizabeth Warren releases Medicare For All plan: no middle class tax increase
- Thread starter Deleted member 4482
- Start date
There's also a website with a calculator to show how the plan would affect a variety of scenarios.
I'm pretty sure I'd be ok with this but the plan doesn't say how much my taxes would increase? I'd like to see that information.
Turns out it's cheaper to buy politicians than pay your taxes. That's probably why all those Wall Street guys are sweating, 'cause they can't buy Warren and if she gets into the White House they're going to have to start paying those taxes.
It's not realistic at all. She's terrified of just fighting for the idea that taxes for everyday people will go up but costs will go down (Like Bernie says) so she makes this pie in the sky 'plan' that will never happen and would likely not pay for everything anyway. She's going to drop M4A the second the GE starts if she gets the nomination, this is just proof of that. Bernie is the only candidate that will legitimately campaign on M4A.
It's funny how only Democrats have to keep their word, come up with pay fors
I don't think its realistic to not increase taxes on the biggest tax base in the long term, but as a rhetorical move I think its a lot smarter than "yall gonna pay for it"
Scrolling down the page, the financial transactions tax she's proposing doesn't work. It dries up trading volume which causes the bid/ask spread to increase, which further dries up trading volume, and then as a result much fewer transactions are ever taxed. Small cap stocks - which have no trading volume to spare - become dangerous speculative bubbles because no one is trading their shares anymore and then those corporations can't raise further capital, they can't sell equity or bonds. This tax is very well known to not work, I don't know why she and Bernie keep insisting it can pay for things.
I have my doubts but it's also unimportant, middle class tax increases shouldn't be an untouchable issue. Many people pay hundreds of dollars a month for health insurance, a tax increase to cover that is more than acceptable.
Problem is the other politicians are still bought off so something like this will be very hard to pass in Congress.
But... Bernie's plan even when making taxes go up, doesn't pay for nearly the amount he's asking for.
To call this one pie in the sky is projecting.
Doesn't matter much in the end anyways. Whatever M4A variation ends up passing Congress will he vastly different from what she's proposing, there's a 0% chance the private insurance industry is getting cut out (no matter how big the Movement™ is), and there's no need to, anyways! Multipayer works fine over here.
I don't know how you're hearing that when Bernie has been releasing plan after plan for years.
Exactly! It's a completely normal thing that the average American would understand. I have PHENOMENAL health insurance (government worker, no deductible, everyone takes it, $25 copay) and I pay close to $600 a month for a family plan. I have no issue if you institute M4A to tax me at a similar rate, and I'm super fortunate as it is. Most people pay more than I do a month for insurance and have insane deductibles and all types of hoops to jump through. Warren is disingenuous when it comes to M4A and I really don't think she believes in it because she's not taking a serious approach to the inner workings of it, instead jumping through hoops to point and say "see, only rich people will pay for it!"
I forget does her M4All plan do away with private insurance all together?
I've always wondered what happens to the insurance companies if that were to happen. Do they just go out of business? What happens to all of the employees?
If her plan allows for private insurance then I suppose they'll still be around but I imagine with a heavily stripped down workforce.
I've always wondered what happens to the insurance companies if that were to happen. Do they just go out of business? What happens to all of the employees?
If her plan allows for private insurance then I suppose they'll still be around but I imagine with a heavily stripped down workforce.
I'm assuming these companies will contract with the federal government to help administer M4All. For example, care firstblue cross blueshield handles the adminstration for FEP, the federal employee program.
Otherwise CMS is going to have to start hiring more people and Maryland is going to be getting a lot of jobs.
Plan seems like smart politics but I hope people don't get too attached. Any actual plan has to go through the senate so the median senator matters way more than the president.
In any case I like the thought of rich assholes making the thought of taxes completely unpalatable to the general populace in order to line their pockets only for that to bite them in the ass with something like Medicare for All where raising for middle class would tank things even if they were better off over all. Fine, guess what, you rich people get to pay for it then.
In any case I like the thought of rich assholes making the thought of taxes completely unpalatable to the general populace in order to line their pockets only for that to bite them in the ass with something like Medicare for All where raising for middle class would tank things even if they were better off over all. Fine, guess what, you rich people get to pay for it then.
Lots of people here parrot what pundits on the news come out with.
I don't understand how she plans to pay for all her programs out of the same exact bucket of revenue when just one of the programs can barely even be covered by that revenue bucket. Yet no major media is even calling her out for it.
Its like
We have Revenue A (Tax the super rich)
Expense A (M4A)
Expense B (Student Loans)
Expense C (Free College)
.....
Revenue A is great than any single expense (barely for some) but all of the combined Expense is much greater any Revenue A.
I mean it allows her to have a talking point in her rallies but its nothing more than fluff.
Its like
We have Revenue A (Tax the super rich)
Expense A (M4A)
Expense B (Student Loans)
Expense C (Free College)
.....
Revenue A is great than any single expense (barely for some) but all of the combined Expense is much greater any Revenue A.
I mean it allows her to have a talking point in her rallies but its nothing more than fluff.
Hmm I suppose that's a possibility. So essentially private insurance companies become government contractors. I used to work for an insurance company doing IT so these plans always made we wonder what would happen to my friends and coworkers if private insurance was basically outlawed.
There are millions of people working in this industry today so navigating these waters while minimizing job loss will need to be huge priority if it's to be enacted.
incorrect. B and C are paid for by the wealth tax not an annual tax increase on the 1%. Same group of people, but different taxes.
If even one of these things happen it will be a life defining accomplishment, all 3 in one presidency is just a fantasy
We live in America where change is nigh impossible and easily rolled back
Because enforcement of laws on the 1% takes an incredible amount of resources and delegation of authority
Not to mention battling bribery attempts and corruption angles within the large moving machine that is the US government
Holding the Rich accountable for malfeasance is an expensive whack a mole that isnt guaranteed to get us results but I am Glad Warren continues the fight
It's because the richest, most powerful country in the world still thinks of itself as a poor when in reality we could easily pay for anything we could possibly want.
Seriously, she's been my favorite candidate from the beginning.
I'd be fine with my taxes going up if the net effect is in the ballpark of what I pay for healthcare now. This is difficult to communicate as a political soundbyte though.
Look, right now we spend about $2,000 a year on health insurance and doctor visits, I'd be fine if our taxes went up $500 if it meant the other $1,500 would be saved and a fluke accident wouldn't bankrupt us. I get that she may fear that the general population is not plugged in enough to understand the savings of M4A even with a small rise in taxes, but like others have said Bernie is running on that platform and doing ok and even he may not have the money to do what he wants (Actually a large hope of his is that with everyone on M4A it will drive down the prices of medication and procedures in addition to his plan to crack down on artificially inflating drug prices like with what has happened with Insulin, thus the cost to cover everyone would be less than it would be today)
We talk too much about how much it's unaffordable without ever coming up with solutions. I'm happy the conversation is starting to turn to "That plan won't work". Good then let's get more people to present plans. We can figure it out. We figured out how to spend over 7 trillion dollars a year already.
I mean, GOP passes shit everyday with even less of a plan or a concern over costs or how things will be paid for. Why hold Dem proposals to a different standard?
Correct me if I'm wrong (and please do), but I think the title of the thread is misleading. It's not that there's "no middle class tax increase," it's that there's "no middle class cost increase," which is an estimation that the increased taxes on middle class Americans would be offset by similar decreases in average premium payments on existing health insurance programs.
I don't think that a multi-trillion-dollar government spending plan can be paid for without increasing taxes on the middle class, but Warren's argument is that costs will remain the same. It's not a trivial distinction.
But, if I'm wrong and she's somehow proposing to not increases taxes at all on the middle class (and therefore, we get free health insurance PLUS our $200-$600/mo premium's back) then I'll happily edit my post because that'd be some magical program.
I don't think that a multi-trillion-dollar government spending plan can be paid for without increasing taxes on the middle class, but Warren's argument is that costs will remain the same. It's not a trivial distinction.
But, if I'm wrong and she's somehow proposing to not increases taxes at all on the middle class (and therefore, we get free health insurance PLUS our $200-$600/mo premium's back) then I'll happily edit my post because that'd be some magical program.
I think what Warren is proposing is a wonderful start, but it is bordering on knowingly lying because her and her team have to know that people outside the 1% and corporations will see their taxes increase to cover such a plan. It's a weird spot to be in when even those that support Warren as the choice for president acknowledge this is about ease of messaging and not about what will actually be implemented. Warren just doesn't want to run on any platform that will increase middle class and below taxes, because she and her team feel that is not a winning strategy. However, whether it is during the primary or the presidential race she is going to have address this obvious half truth she is selling.
OP
OP
One good way to find out if your post is accurate is to read the OP.
"Congress can't get its act together" because McConnell is a shithead and Trump offers zero guidance to his party. Pelosi has passed a number of bills in the House that barely get any coverage since no one thinks they'll become law anyway until Democrats take the Senate and presidency. The incompetence here is hardly one-sided.
That being said, the survival rate of Warren's hypothetical plans comes down entirely to the margins the Democrats win the Senate by, both in terms of flexibility in winning votes and also willingness to abolish the filibuster. If you're right at 50 and counting on Manchin and Sinema to deliver on everything, forget about it unless it's being passed by reconciliation. Medicare for All probably could be, but I'm extremely doubtful about its chances of becoming law, even if the Democrats end up with 55 seats and no filibuster.
Still, it is great that Warren came up with a plan. Clinton also had plans that would have worked well if they were implemented, but they were all limited in scope due to the reality that she would probably have faced a Republican Congress had she been elected. It's hard to inspire people when you can't even sell yourself on your ideal - I think it's great to have backup plans that acknowledge political shortcomings, but less so that those should be made front and center to represent who you are. Clinton originally wanted to include UBI in her platform, but her economists found they couldn't make the numbers work without a massive tax increase and they dropped it - in hindsight, taking the "promise awesome shit, fill in the details once in office" road may have served her better electorally.