13355145, She was damned if she did damned if she didn't tho.|
Posted by kfine, Thu Nov-07-19 08:34 PM
>one of the worst things that happened to it.
>bernie is just like fuck it we are gonna raise your taxes but
>hypothetically decrease out of pocket medical expenses.
>warren...who usually has clear concise sensible plans for
>everything...put out a convoluted mess just to stick to the
>'no tax raises for the middle class' script. it relies on
>stuff like immigration reform passing...which we know wont
Oddly enough, her plan made me respect her even more. Like, she did what I assumed was impossible... I'm one of the most vocal M4A-skeptics ever and now I'm only mildly anti (lol) and support America at least trying her M4A plan out. Do I think it could pass into law? ehh. Do I think it could be sustained? Repubs would gut that shit the moment they took back power (leaving everyone with an underfunded overstrained system and no alternatives since the Dems would have killed private health insurance). But she's badass for putting out an M4A plan that might actually work if it was law, though not without issues. Like.. EVEN IF she and Bernie are both overestimating the extent of their plans' cost savings, and underestimating the extent utilization will increase once all of America is covered, and underestimating the number of doctors that would elect out of practicing within the system due to such drastic paycuts... her financing proposal is still stronger in my eyes bc the inevitable ballooning costs would fall mostly on corporations and the super wealthy as opposed to lower/middle income taxpayers.
But ya, there's hella risk in relying on CIR for revenue as you said. Not to mention a massive defense cut which has been talked about for years with no traction and what are likely to be deeply unpopular corporate taxation reforms. Oh ya and the problem with funding a staple program by relying on sticking billionaires with a multi-billion dollar tax bill each year is that there's relatvely few of them and eventually M4A will eat up all their billions and slow the formation of more so... lol. Especially considering her proposed capital gains tax changes too. I feel like people really underestimate how much of a black hole M4A would be.
leaving room to pivot to something
>transitional like a public option (she stated medicare for all
>was simply a 'framework'). but then she doubled down after
>she was put under pressure during/following the last debate.
Personally? I think she is still capable of pivoting once it comes time to actually govern. But she needed to cost this plan. Not only due to growing pressure from less progressive opponents/pundits/the public, but also to differentiate herself from Bernie. A lot of the punditry around M4A is starting to focus more on her now, as opposed to Bernie, because she actually cut the bullshit and put out hard numbers. I respect her effort to turn M4A from a series of talking points into substantive policy.
>i think her doubling down on m4a as it falls in popularity is
>the main reason for her leveling off or falling in polls. >bernie already has m4a baked into his cake. no matter how
>(un)favorable the general public views it...those who support
>him are riding with him on everything regardless. but liz is
>kinda live with the plan/policy die by the plan/policy.
I guess we'll see. But it looks like her M4A proposal is becoming the "referent" now, for lack of a better term. Yes Bernie can say he "wrote the damn bill" but he didn't feel the need to show his work so *shrug* too bad. Furthermore, now the costing question can be set up like "If America chooses M4A who should pay: the middle class taxpayers? or corporations, ultra-millionaires and billionaires?" If M4A has any shot at all... Warren is now the better-equipped salesperson and she kinda out-manouvered Bernie a bit too.