How about President Trumps answer to how 1.9 trillion dollar tax cut was going to be paid for? He really just cut an pasted the whole trickle down economics line will created new tax revenue. Do you really believe the situation is better post tax break?
You'll be hard pressed to find a poster that thinks less of the president than I do. And I've created multiple threads criticizing the tax cuts bill.
Tax cuts are projected to increase deficits by $2T over 10 years and obviously corporate cuts are permanent. So restoring tax brackets to pre-cut levels would hardly put a dent in the medicare-for-all proposal.
And just for the record yeah, I think spending on medicare is a far better spend than on tax cuts for primarily rich dudes and large corporations. That doesn't make her answer adequate, through. Far from it.
Yes the number of employed has improved but there are questions about wages is still being questioned an is the economy on a stable footing.
Agreed. Inequality is still a problem and could certainly get worse. I generally support policy that combats that.
I believe the idea of reducing our use of petroleum is a national security issue as well as setting a course for the future. She talks about a 12 year timeline overly optimistic yes but you shoot for Mars an hope you get to the moon.
I'm a big proponent of strong action on climate change, but I'm hardly an expert so I'll leave solutions to people who know what the hell they're talking about. But I'm all for it. The sort of high level piece that's missing from her proposal is that we need to get the planet on board, which requires complicated deals. That may include keeping and strengthening trade agreements, which her types hate. Again, this is out of my league but we can't make a dent in the problem with getting countries like China, India, any other emerging countries, etc. also getting on board.
There are ways these things get paid for with a little additional pain like slight tax increase vs paying 7500 a year for coverage.
I heard a national health care plan would cost around 200 to 400 per month per person vs around 500 to 800 per month or more per person from an insurance provider.
There are ways to reduce these numbers by negotiating fair drug prices an rates business charges. Right now due to government policies we are limited in how to address these issues. AOC is going to have to do a better job selling it but Anderson Copper is no friend to progressive efforts.
I was initially on the universal healthcare train, then skeptical, but now I'm on the "it's looking like the best option forward train" again. I'm completely open to working through policy that makes it feasible. But what doesn't help the conversation is when proponents of said policy cannot answer questions like this. You've literally just given a better answer than she did. If she can't articulate the proposal then she's not the best messenger.
The best answer is that there are studies that show medicare-for-all would reduce net healthcare spending, therefore making it cheaper for the vast majority of people. Instead she whined about Republican policy and lack of criticism (which also isn't true).