A new report from renowned economists proves Bernie's plan "would lead to a large tax cut for the vast majority of workers"
|Oct 25||Public post|| 46|
Bern Notice is a production of the Bernie 2020 campaign. Please forward this on to your friends and tell them to subscribe. The views expressed here are solely of the bylined author.
Industry-bankrolled presidential candidates have spent months reciting GOP talking points claiming that Bernie’s Medicare for All plan would raise middle class taxes — but as of this morning, those wildly dishonest claims have been comprehensively debunked by renowned economists.
In a scathing new oped in The Guardian, University of California economists Gabriel Zucman and Emmanuel Saez meticulously review the data, and conclude that Bernie’s Medicare for All “would lead to a large tax cut for the vast majority of workers.” Zucman and Saez are the acclaimed authors of the new book The Triumph of Injustice: How the Rich Dodge Taxes and How to Make Them Pay.
Here’s the key passage providing more detail on their conclusions about Bernie’s plan:
Bernie Sanders’s tax proposals would be enough to replace all existing private insurance premiums, while leaving 2.6% of national income to cover the uninsured and spend on other programs. Under such a plan, the 9 bottom deciles of the income distribution would gain income on average, as would the bottom of the top 10%. With smart new taxes—such as broad income taxes exempting low wages and retirees—it is possible to make the vast majority of the population win from a transition to universal health insurance.
Supporters of Medicare for All are right. Funding universal health insurance through taxes would lead to a large tax cut for the vast majority of workers. It would abolish the huge poll tax they currently shoulder, and the data show that for most workers, it would lead to the biggest take-home pay raise in a generation.
This new oped follows a USA Today oped from President Barack Obama’s Medicare chief, which slammed Democratic opponents of Bernie’s plan for “parrot(ing) right-wing attacks on Medicare for All.”
So why are some Democratic candidates nonetheless parroting those GOP attacks on a Medicare for All initiative that is supported by the majority of House Democrats?
Why are these anti-Medicare-for-All presidential candidates so insistent on lying about health care and taxes?
Maybe the answer can be found by
Bern after reading,