Kamala Harris: Medicare for all, free pre-K, debt free college, $500 guaranteed pay increase

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Running on the everything is free playbook from Bernie. Another politician with empty promises to buy votes, go figure. Howard Schultz who’s also considering a run voiced grave concern recently over this mentality of everything needs to be free and that our trillions in debt are the biggest crisis facing this country. If he runs on that he’ll have my vote no matter what his other positions are.

 

mect

Platinum Member
Jan 5, 2004
2,424
1,636
136
Medicare for All - not free, paid for through taxes, but a net savings for most Americans since Medicare for All would likely save our country money.
Universal pre-K - again, not free, paid for through taxes, however once again likely to save money (although not short term) since pre-K has been shown to improve education outcomes which will save money later in life. Research has quite thoroughly shown it is far cheaper and more effective to educate at a young age than it is to correct at an older age.
Debt free college - Not free, just affordable, similar to how college was when all the boomers were going to school.
Middle class family tax cut - right there in the tweet how it will be paid for.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
29,239
29,523
136
Running on the everything is free playbook from Bernie. Another politician with empty promises to buy votes, go figure. Howard Schultz who’s also considering a run voiced grave concern recently over this mentality of everything needs to be free and that our trillions in debt are the biggest crisis facing this country. If he runs on that he’ll have my vote no matter what his other positions are.


It isn't the everything is free playbook she is talking about tax increases in pay for it.

Yes just what we need another business man who doesn't understand the difference between a corporation and government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: darkswordsman17

UglyCasanova

Lifer
Mar 25, 2001
19,275
1,361
126
Not free, just affordable, similar to how college was when all the boomers were going to school.


So how do you drive down the cost of college, especially when opening it up to more people. Or is the true cost the same and rising, we just subsidize it more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mean MrMustard
Nov 8, 2012
20,842
4,785
146
It isn't the everything is free playbook she is talking about tax increases in pay for it.

Yes just what we need another business man who doesn't understand the difference between a corporation and government.

And you also need a calculator because these fucking retarded liberals still don't understand that if they made a 90% tax bracket for those making $10m+ they STILL wouldn't have anywhere the amount of funding needed for "free medicare". You can't play the stupid game of calling rich people evil forever. At some point you have to actually have facts.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,842
4,785
146
So how do you drive down the cost of college, especially when opening it up to more people. Or is the true cost the same and rising, we just subsidize it more.

Anyone with half a brain knows the answer to that: Telling kids "I'm sorry, you're too fucking stupid for this University. maybe you will have better luck getting accepted to xyz trade school instead" is the only way to have "free college"
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
29,239
29,523
136
And you also need a calculator because these fucking retarded liberals still don't understand that if they made a 90% tax bracket for those making $10m+ they STILL wouldn't have anywhere the amount of funding needed for "free medicare". You can't play the stupid game of calling rich people evil forever. At some point you have to actually have facts.

I'm not aware of anyone who has suggested funding medicare for all out of an income tax only on rich people. Most of the proposals would essentially replace the amounts being spent on private health insurance with new taxes and create a single payer system with a far greater ability to manage costs going forward and broader coverage.

Yes "liberals" (if you can call Ann Coulter a liberal for example) frequently cite the desire to increase taxes on the rich but that is far from the only funding mechanism for big ticket items.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,256
9,443
136
Medicare for all is something I 100% support.

Yet I respect the opinion (or fear rather...) of Americans who have more pressing concerns. More important than even their own health, or that of their families. See, they're not entirely stupid. They know it'll cost a mighty penny to pay for this.

My view is that, by starting with asking people to "pay" for Healthcare, you've scared them off. It is putting the cart before the horse. We need people feeling secure in both food and housing before we extend our reach beyond absolute, immediate, necessities. The entire fight against the ACA was that the American people, too many of them, think they don't need to pay for Healthcare. That the market will provide, or some similar BS. They will not understand the tax for it, as much as they'll understand the tax to pay for food and shelter.

Instead of starting the conversation with such a difficult subject, I believe it is our more pressing concern to talk about the Safety Net from the ground up. Basic Income and a Housing Loan Program. Those have huge, immediate, return on investments. People understand getting $1,000/mo. They understand NEVER being foreclosed on, and never missing a house payment. Never being homeless for financial reasons. They'd eventually understand the great bounty that is the $216,000 nest egg EACH child receives at 18. These are huge, life altering programs to directly benefit our people.

Healthcare is similar, but once you do all these things you're looking at a total tax rate between 40-50%. People cannot comprehend that being a good deal for them today. We need to prioritize and get the ball rolling with parts we need the most, that directly benefit them the most. Then convince people that a similar benefit awaits them for other programs, like Medicare.

As for Education, that needs to be revolutionized to cost a fraction of what it does today. For most fields we can achieve cost effective solutions, and then we'll see what remains in the budget to assist in paying for it. Our workforce needs to be healthy and educated, and these things are not mutually exclusive, but I think we need to tread carefully with respect to what we ask people to pay for, before we demonstrate the benefits to them.

We need to understand that these programs are not cheap, our people already know and fear that. We need to demonstrate the benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Meghan54 and Lanyap

paperfist

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
6,539
286
126
www.the-teh.com
Running on the everything is free playbook from Bernie. Another politician with empty promises to buy votes, go figure. Howard Schultz who’s also considering a run voiced grave concern recently over this mentality of everything needs to be free and that our trillions in debt are the biggest crisis facing this country. If he runs on that he’ll have my vote no matter what his other positions are.


Give up, she’s going to win on looks alone.
 

brycejones

Lifer
Oct 18, 2005
29,239
29,523
136
S0me0ne in this thread throws the words “stupid” and “retarded” around an awful lot for someone who just might not be that bright himself

He is a professional Tax Detective paid hundreds of dollars per hour who can post all day long he is so busy.
 

sdifox

No Lifer
Sep 30, 2005
99,146
17,466
126
And you also need a calculator because these fucking retarded liberals still don't understand that if they made a 90% tax bracket for those making $10m+ they STILL wouldn't have anywhere the amount of funding needed for "free medicare". You can't play the stupid game of calling rich people evil forever. At some point you have to actually have facts.

... So rest of the western world get universal health care by magic? Even pissant place like Taiwan managed to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whm1974 and Bitek

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,766
543
126
And you also need a calculator because these fucking retarded liberals still don't understand that if they made a 90% tax bracket for those making $10m+ they STILL wouldn't have anywhere the amount of funding needed for "free medicare". You can't play the stupid game of calling rich people evil forever. At some point you have to actually have facts.

What you fail to understand is that it is not expected for the tax revenue from the people making tons of money so that their income above $10 million gets hit with 70% to pay for "Medicare for all."


Higher marginal tax rates on the incomes above a certain level (not the entirety person's income from their 1st dollar onward is going to be tax at 70% as some fox hosts try lie people into believing) are not expected to get no reaction.

If a business man has a business or a few that is/are profitable enough for him to gain tens of millions of dollars on income with a high marginal tax rate he may think "I'm not giving the Government all this free money" then decide to take a lower payday and keep much more of the money in his business(es)
what happens then? likely the business(es) will grow larger and expand, benefiting more of the economy as a whole than just one person with if the top marginal tax rates were lower.

As stated in the video by the MIT professor during the decades of 70% plus marginal tax rates growth was very good in the U.S.


_________
 

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
8,057
8,860
136
Running on the everything is free playbook from Bernie. Another politician with empty promises to buy votes, go figure. Howard Schultz who’s also considering a run voiced grave concern recently over this mentality of everything needs to be free and that our trillions in debt are the biggest crisis facing this country. If he runs on that he’ll have my vote no matter what his other positions are.

Everything you said is essentially wrong.

Something isn't free just because you pay for it with taxes to the gub'mint, instead of a direct payment to a third party attempting to extract as much profit as they can, legally or illegally.

Also, please name one way in which the debt has hurt you financially, over the past 70 years.

Bonus(es):

Of the trillions in "debt", what percentage is owed to other branches of the US government? You know, kinda like your checking account owing your savings account $1.00.

What percentage of the debt is owed to US citizens who use treasury bonds as INVESTMENT INCOME. You know, the US government owing a US citizen money, which benefits the gub'mint, AND the US citizen who purposefully and knowingly purchased the treasury bond.

Now, I realize I'm asking very relevant and pertinent questions that most people don't even know to ask. Rarely are the actual logistics of the big bad debt discussed, especially from a media that is afraid of not terrorizing US citizens into hysterics over an accounting column. So, I'll give you some assistance.

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/mts/current.html

PS: This isn't a goalpost-moving discussion that involves me implying that the US gub'mint should just go out and borrow $20T tomorrow and helicopter dump it into the Pacific Ocean. Just to be clear.

I'll wait here. Should be a good, substantive discussion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,766
543
126
~snip~ Another politician with empty promises to buy votes, go figure. ~snip~

Kamala Harris is no Progressive....

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/17/opinion/kamala-harris-criminal-justice.html

Kamala Harris Was Not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor’

Time after time, when progressives urged her to embrace criminal justice reforms as a district attorney and then the state’s attorney general, Ms. Harris opposed them or stayed silent. Most troubling, Ms. Harris fought tooth and nail to uphold wrongful convictions that had been secured through official misconduct that included evidence tampering, false testimony and the suppression of crucial information by prosecutors.
Consider her record as San Francisco’s district attorney from 2004 to 2011. Ms. Harris was criticized in 2010 for withholding information about a police laboratory technician who had been accused of “intentionally sabotaging” her work and stealing drugs from the lab. After a memo surfaced showing that Ms. Harris’s deputies knew about the technician’s wrongdoing and recent conviction, but failed to alert defense lawyers, a judge condemned Ms. Harris’s indifference to the systemic violation of the defendants’ constitutional rights.

yeah it's an opinion piece but the author provides links to back up her assertions... which coupled will Sen. Harris's fairly well know refusal to prosecute a bank in which Mnuchin was rather highly ranked for its abuses of people with mortgages then taking a donation from Mnuchin. She was the only democratic party member he donated to.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/05...why-she-didnt-prosecute-steven-mnuchins-bank/

https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/0...ter-failing-to-prosecute-trump-nominees-bank/

Also this.....

https://forums.anandtech.com/thread...arren-or-gabbard.2559930/page-6#post-39714209
 
  • Like
Reactions: nickqt

Greenman

Lifer
Oct 15, 1999
21,863
6,239
136
I have the same response I had in the AOC thread. We've had the sales pitch, now we need the engineer to tell us how it works. I can be convinced, all it takes is actual numbers, real numbers from the real world that aren't based on never ending population growth. If those numbers are reasonable, and proper controls are in place, I'm all in.