How many of you support Sanders' plan to raise the payroll tax on *everybody* to fund his platform?

[hill2016]

I've been accused of many bad things in this thread so I'm curious how many people support his plan to raise taxes on *everybody* (including you).

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251834909

For context (3min45seconds)

[Duckhunter935]

1. I do

Do not paying slightly more for the greater good of the less fortunate. Single payer Weill offset what those people pay to the for profit insurance companies

[99th_Monkey]

13. +10 well said. nt

[Hoyt]

54. Not a strong Sanders supporter, but I'd pay more for greater good.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

113. I'd rather pay more for health than bombs

[840high]

92. Amen.

[roguevalley]

129. I'm in. I'm proud to support my

country. I am not proud for cheapskates who whine about taxes and probably have more money than me skating.

[EndElectoral]

149. I'd rather pay for his platform than another war.

[canosoviejo]

2. I would pay more for a better system. NT

[merrily]

3. .

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

4. I pay $60 a paycheck for high deductible crap insurance where I work

After $1600 in deductible it pays 70% of medical costs till a cap of 6k.

I'd prefer a tax.

[brewens]

93. Ya got that right! My insurance is better but I still had to fork over about three large

to get my knee scoped last spring. Add about $600 for my contribution plus I'm not exactly sure what my employer pays for my medical. That's gotta be another four grand or so. Between my employer and I, we pretty much just paid for it. And in just one year. Look at the other nine years I've been there with almost no claims. It's not even really insurance anymore. More like and organized crime looting scam.

[AgingAmerican]

120. Yep, we have to pay $5,000 out of pocket before our insurance kicks in each year

That's on top of what we pay every month. I would love a 2.2% tax paying for Medicare for all. Better healthcare for less than half the cost.

Like Republicans, Hillary's core supporters blow a gasket on tax policy without ever considering the implications.

[brewens]

125. Then if it takes cost off of employers, some at least, mine would pretty much have to

pay some of that out in wages or bonuses. I work for a not for profit corporation.

I still remember the first time an insurance company got my raise. I had the bosses totally surrounded. The office manager even agreed it should be a slam dunk. I was salary and they had made changes that forced me to do more work and put in more hours. I wasn't even really asking for and hourly rate hike, I was just wanting to be paid for the extra work I had been doing.

Guess what? My insurance premiums had just gone up $100 bucks a month and my deductable as well. This was about the time Clinton was in office and Hillary was working on her plan. Nope. No freakin' raise. They were paying $100 more a month on me and I wasn't getting anything!

[Enthusiast]

148. Implications should be the main factor. If not.....duh.

[drray23]

5. it cant be an open ended support

I mean, with all the things that Bernie want to tackle, he has yet to come up with a breakdown of how much it would cost.

In principle I do not mind paying more if this is to setup a system similar to what is available in the european countries. However it is disingenuous to pretend that we will magically go from where we are now to denmark like social system in one presidency and with just a bit of extra taxes.

[99th_Monkey]

18. Closing Corporate tax loopholes, ending welfare for the rich, for Wall St. and the MIC

cannot be accurately described as "just a bit of extra taxes". The bulk of the new tax revenues will
be paid by those who can actually AFFORD to pay them, and the modest increases for lower income
folks pale in comparison to -- and are more than offset by -- the financial benefits of:
a) a $15 minimum wage,
b) not paying through the nose for crappy for-profit health care plans, and
c) free college educations for any who keep their grades up.

[Karma13612]

49. ++++10000

precisely.

[JDPriestly]

80. Europeans with their single payer systems pay less for healthcare than we do.

And included in their healthcare insurances is dental care!

Plus when I lived in Austria and enjoyed single payer insurance, my friends went for Kurs, that is they went to places called baths where they recuperated from various illnesses or withdrew from alcoholism or whatever. There were various types of Kurs. (Cures, I suppose. Spas maybe.)

Pete Peterson (I consider him to be a conservative) says we spend twice as much as the average of other countries per capita on our healthcare.

http://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0006_health-care-oecd

Our system is not working.

We might pay a higher tax, but the overall cost of our healthcare would decrease if we adopted single payer.

Single payer makes financial sense.

[MADem]

102. This payroll tax is not for "health care." It's for family and medical leave. Watch the video. nt

[blackspade]

123. Excellent.

I'm all for it.

[JDPriestly]

127. I know. The OP suggested a hike in payroll taxes. If you raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour,

a small rise in the payroll tax is not going to be felt, and we absolutely need family care leave. Employers should not be paying for it. That is Hillary's plan -- to have the employers pay for it -- as I understand it.

If an employer knows that hiring a young woman may mean he has to pay for her family leave, it is like he will discriminate against young women in hiring.

So the family leave costs should be paid via the payroll tax. It would be a tiny amount of money from paychecks that grow when the $15 minimum wage is adopted.

No one is going to mind that. Family leave policy should apply to LGBT as well as other families.

Recently, I was waiting for a plane and saw two young men holding twin babies and trying to get a rather elaborate stroller into some sort of stroller bag. The wheels were off. The babies were hanging in carrying sacks on the men's chests. Two babies. Two daddies. I said. I could not help but say it out loud because the babies and the daddies were so clearly enjoying themselves and the whole area of the waiting room in which I was sitting was giving advice and lending hands here and there to these two new daddies. They deserve to have family leave just as all moms and dads with new babies.

I'm all for family leave paid in a small weekly payment added to the payroll tax. It will give so much joy. And as a nation we can afford it. We can't afford not to do it.

I researched this some time ago. We are one of maybe three nations that don't provide paid family leave. One of the other ones is Sierra Leone.

The state of our social services is pitiful. Shameful. An international disgrace.

Feel the Bern! This tiny tax will help new parents in our country so much. I'm all for it.

[MADem]

134. That small hike will probably be most of the pay raise. And then the people will be in a higher

bracket, so they'll pay more income tax.

Horrible idea. The employers should pay it. They're paying it anyway, if it's IN THE PAYROLL.

And if the employer pays it, he can deduct for it, while the employee isn't taxed at a higher rate for money he isn't getting.

[Bluenorthwest]

158. But the OP is about Sander's platform, the Family Leave Act is Gillibrand's bill, Bernie is just one

of many Democratic co-sponsors of that bill, which has been around for 2 years now. So I'm not really following why a Gillibrand bill with broad Democratic support is being tagged as 'Bernie's platform' at all.

I'd say if you have issues with the bill, take them to Gillibrand. She's a Senator. US Senator.

[MADem]

159. If you watch the video, he's the guy who is saying that.

Unless KG has aged mightily, that ain't her doing the touting. You're not telling me that a co-sponsor has no skin in the game, surely?

I don't think that expenditure should be placed on the individual consumer--it affects their tax bracket. The employer should shoulder it and be given a break for so doing.

And as we all know (most of us, anyway), income taxes are severely regressive, and they fuck over the lower middle class and the middle class most onerously. The very poor and the very rich either don't end up paying much of anything, or, in the case of the rich, they can find loopholes a plenty so they effectively pay no actual tax or they pay far less as a percentage than even the quite poor.

[AgingAmerican]

131. It's way cheaper

It cuts the scammers and middlemen out of the equation.

[Enthusiast]

151. It's not disingenuous and no one is pretending.

If the USA were to create a new Medicare for All system why would it not take the best qualities from the Western European systems? Like the massive savings. If we were starting from scratch why would we have a table full of insurance industry spokesmen and pharmaceutical industry executives sitting there telling us how to create it? That would be fucking stupid.

Unlike the ACA the insurance industry would not be invited to the party and drug prices would be controlled. Otherwise what is the fucking point?

You status quo guys keep saying this stuff about the cost. Why? Every single payer system is way cheaper than the current system in place in the USA.

Where would these added expenses you imagine come from? We could care less if insurance companies are deprived of premiums. We would rather pay an increase in taxes and no premiums at all, no co pay and no deductible.

It. Would. Be. Cheaper. Way. Cheaper.

[HerbChestnut]

6. To my knowledge, the only program that will increase the payroll tax is paid family/medical leave

And that will only raise payroll taxes by an average of $1.40ish per week. Every other program will be paid by progressive tax systems or Wall Street speculation taxes.

[CentralMass]

7. Yes.

[Cheese Sandwich]

8. Hillary is undermining the best work of Senate Democrats

This is why people call her Republican lite.

The tax you are talking about is Senator Gillibrand's Family Act, currently co-sponsored by all these Democrats.

Cosponsor Date Cosponsored
Sen. Brown, Sherrod [D-OH]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Booker, Cory A. [D-NJ]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Mikulski, Barbara A. [D-MD]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Schatz, Brian [D-HI]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Baldwin, Tammy [D-WI]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Reed, Jack [D-RI]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Warren, Elizabeth [D-MA]* 03/18/2015
Sen. Durbin, Richard [D-IL] 04/13/2015
Sen. Sanders, Bernard [I-VT] 06/10/2015
Sen. Murphy, Christopher S. [D-CT] 06/16/2015
Sen. Udall, Tom [D-NM] 06/23/2015
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] 06/23/2015
Sen. Klobuchar, Amy [D-MN] 07/08/2015
Sen. Franken, Al [D-MN] 09/10/2015

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/786/cosponsors

The American Opportunity Agenda: Expand Paid Family and Medical Leave



Creating such a program is common sense, fiscally responsible solution for those who are having a child, or attending to a medical crisis, and still need to provide for their families basic needs.

http://www.gillibrand.senate.gov/issues/paid-family-medical-leave

If Hillary is against this I think maybe she should be on the debate stage with the Republicans because that's where a right wing demagogue belongs.

[jkbRN]

11. Agreed

[Oilwellian]

29. Indeed

We've been seeing a lot of right wing propaganda on DU lately. Democrats have wanted paid family leave for years. If Hillary supporters are against it, it would probably be best for your candidate, to keep it to yourself.

[Bluenorthwest]

36. The OP and many others are unable to recognize Democratic legislation when they see it.

nt

[daleanime]

60. Yeahup.....

[ms liberty]

62. This. Disgusting to see alleged democrats against these issues.

[JDPriestly]

84. Please post that as an OP for a new thread. Great post. Wonderful information.

[Cheese Sandwich]

114. Maybe later sometime

Thanks. I actually copied the idea from another DU post by someone else but I can't remember who.

It was a few weeks ago when Hillary people were screaming about a "flat tax". Bernie wants a "Flat tax" was their talking point a couple weeks ago.

[TBF]

97. That's exactly where she should be -

on the debate stage with the republicans. With her desire to fund war and cut social security she certainly does not belong on stage with democrats.

[jkbRN]

9. I support it

We would save money paying through taxes compared to paying private insurance companies who are there to make a profit.

[CharlotteVale]

10. I do.

[Wilms]

12. It's OK to raise them.

In exchange for medical and education it's a bargain. It levels the field.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

14. Show me a liberal who doesn't support it, and I'll show you someone who isn't a liberal.

You may want to small-group these sorts of questions before your next gig, so that you don't seem so taken aback at liberal values.

[Demeter]

64. +several brazillion, as W would say (how much is a Brazilian?)

It would be nice to get something for the taxes we pay, for once, besides a world blown to hell and banksters so criminal that they should be jailed.

[Juicy_Bellows]

15. I got no issue with his proposal. So yes, I'm fine with it. Nt.

[Jarqui]

16. Why can't the question be asked fairly?

Sanders is proposing to raise taxes ... but in a single payer system, the government pays for healhcare.

The typical person who paid for healthcare could be relieved of paying some or all of the deductible.

AND all people who paid for healthcare won't have to pay for it any more under a single payer system.

Single payer is geared to reduced costs. People typically paying 14% of their income now could pay 9% tax under Sanders plan and save 5% of their net after-tax, after-healthcare income. So the net effect is for them to save money by paying some tax that is less than the healthcare they're paying for now.

So can we please consider the whole proposal - not just one side/part of it?

And the net effect is lower rates in part, because the insurance pool is the whole country.

[bvf]

38. Why can't the question be asked fairly?

A glance at the user name on the OP should be enough of an answer.

[Duckhunter935]

41. Just another smear

Posting untruthful information. Not surprised by that user.

[Autumn]

17. Yes I do

best idea I have heard any politician say in years. Donald Trump fucking sucks and no democrats should post anything he says without mocking Trump. Of course I can see you didn't watch what Bernie said in the video And once again you must be told the family leave bill he is talking about in that video , which would be a very modest increase in payroll tax that would help all working families is not his bill. Your OPs on

Bernie's plan to raise the payroll tax on *everybody* to fund his platform

are becoming a parody. Repeatedly you have been told that is not his bill. But it is a fucking great bill and any Democrat should be damn proud to support Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and her thoughtfulness and hard work writing that bill that will benefit all working American families. When working American families benefit we all benifit

[Vincardog]

19. Yes it is worth $1.40/week from each of us so new mothers and fathers can bond with their children

Who would begrudge them that?

[JonLeibowitz]

20. Yes, evidence points to most Americans receiving a net benefit

Take-home pay isn't everything. Taxes aren't the full picture.

[Chan790]

21. I do.

I almost-universally oppose tax cuts. I think the tax-rate is too damned low and the safety net too damned small.

[Agschmid]

50. Yup.

[99th_Monkey]

22. Your premise is bogus: "everyone" will not pay higher taxes

The poor who are unemployed and those who are retired do not pay any payroll tax, and
so would not have ANY tax "increase".

Under the Sanders Administration, the bulk of new tax revenue will be paid by those who can
actually AFFORD to pay them, i.e. closing Corporate tax loopholes, ending welfare for the rich,
for Wall St. and the MIC; and the modest increases for lower income folks pale in comparison
to -- and are more than offset by -- the financial benefits of:
a) a $15 minimum wage,
b) not paying through the nose for crappy for-profit health care plans (or NO health care at all), and
c) free college educations for anyone who want one and who can keep their grades up.

[Prism]

23. Tax increases to aid families will never phase me

I can't imagine they would phase any Democrat or self-described liberal.

It's interesting to see these attacks on what is basic Democratic platform stuff.

[Warren Stupidity]

24. Heck if your first three attempts were fail

how bad could the fourth be?

Oh wait. Perhaps your worst so far.

I would gladly transfer my monthly premiums and other assorted payouts to the private insurance system to a payroll tax based not for profit universal public system.

Lower costs, better outcomes, not tied to employment, everyone covered from birth to death.

That is what you are opposing.

[Android3.14]

25. What is your issue with the proposed tax?

The impact on the lower income folks will be minimal and we get public healthcare. I'd like to know what your beef is?

[femmedem]

26. Yes, I believe family leave should be funded by taxpayers. Otherwise employers are incentivized

not to hire people who are likely to be starting families, or to not offer paid leave.

Do I think this would result in a tax increase under a Sanders presidency? I think it would be more than offset by smaller military expenditures.

[tularetom]

27. Me, because this problem is bigger than any one person

And I don't mind paying a little more just to benefit a lot of people.

[arcane1]

28. That's far less than my monthly insurance premioum n/t

[Duckhunter935]

30. Payroll taxes are not paid by *everybody*

So why do you have to once again tell a falsehood? I get it it seems like you must love the current for profit insurance companies that gouge the poor if they can even afford it.

Care to run a correction on your obvious smear directed at Bernie and his supporters. And you have the nerve to complain.

[restorefreedom]

32. true. only those already paying payroll tax will see a tiny increase.

very different than "everybody"

[Duckhunter935]

34. It would be nice if the OP would correct that

But I expect that not to happen as it is obviously posted as a smear against Bernie.

[restorefreedom]

37. yeah, i wouldn't hold my breath. true or not, it messes with the narrative.nt

[MADem]

104. How tiny? And a tax that doesn't affect the wealthy is a regressive tax.

Poor people get paychecks. Rich people live off their investments.

If everyone pays a "tiny" amount, the burden is heavier on the poor person.

And this tax? It is for family and medical leave, not "his platform." It is a very specific tax with a specific goal.

[restorefreedom]

105. actually, most of the cost will be borne by the wealthy

as bernie closes loopholes and gets rid of cayman island tax shelters. so its not regressive at all.

[MADem]

107. No, it won't. Rich people do not get paychecks, and this is a proposed PAYROLL TAX.

And those loophole closures that Senator Sanders is proposing have about as much hope of being passed by the wealthy members of Congress as I have the hope of 'passing' a diamond-studded golden stool.

He won't get his money that way. Any proposals will be studied to death, tabled, and they'll die in committee. If he were serious about this he'd sneak up on them--incremental is the way to go. Death by a thousand cuts, not slash-and-burn.

[restorefreedom]

111. well I suppose if you DID pass such a stool,

your worries about health care copays would be over

more info and specifics here

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gerald-friedman/the-wall-street-journal-k_b_8143062.html

[restorefreedom]

31. support. most will get far more back in savings than what they put in. nt

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

33. I do. Taxes are what we pay for civilized society. Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr.

At least sometimes when the politicians have the backbone to deny some to the military.

[Armstead]

35. I suppose it's Supply Side Hillary now eh? Clinton the Progressive was so "last week"

[bravenak]

39. No

[NurseJackie]

40. I don't.

What's next? A national sales tax?

[JDPriestly]

108. The VAT. It also works well in Europe.

The VAT value added tax is imposed on products, both imported and exported. It raises a lot of money for social programs. Could help raise money for our schools. And it evens the playing field a bit between imported and domestically produced products in that some of the taxes that corporations should pay and some of our taxes for social programs can be raised on the sale of imported products. Imported products cost our society a lot more than the sticker price, and we need to collect the taxes on them to make up the difference.

No candidate is proposing this. And here in California we already pay VAT or sales taxes on items we buy, so the costs to consumers in states that already have VAT taxes would have to be compensated somehow.

[Bluenorthwest]

157. CA has a simple sales tax, not a Value Added Tax. Very different, no State has a VAT.

Oregon has no sales taxes and does not want any, thanks. They are regressive as fuck. They are still not a Value Added Tax. At all.

[JDPriestly]

162. What do you mean by VAT? How do you think it differs from a sales tax?

[Agnosticsherbet]

42. If we are going to do it, everbody should pay their fair share....even me.

But mostly he has said it will be taxes on Walls Street, big banks, yadda... Sanders FDR style programs can not be enacted without FDR's Congress. (Between 1933 and 1947 Democrats control congress and the great legislation he created was managed because Democrats controlled congress. )

I don't think the American people will vote for it if handed a big tax increase. Small tax increases, they will go along with, but unless we get a FDR class Congress, it won't happen.

I don't think an FDR class Congress exists in the foreseeable future that will legislate that program into existence. (OK, may in 2021 if Democrats vote to gain control of the state houses that redraw voting districts. )
Composition of Congress Since 1867

Senator Dem Rep Other House Dem Rep other President
73d 1933–1935 96 59 36 1 435 313 117 5 Roosevelt
74th 1935–1937 96 69 25 2 435 322 103 10 Roosevelt
75th 1937–1939 96 75 17 4 435 333 89 13 Roosevelt
76th 1939–1941 96 69 23 4 435 262 169 4 Roosevelt
77th 1941–1943 96 66 28 2 435 267 162 6 Roosevelt
78th 1943–1945 96 57 38 1 435 222 209 4 Roosevelt
79th 1945–1947 96 57 38 1 435 243 190 2 Roosevelt/Truman
80th 1947–1949 96 45 51 0 435 188 246 1 Truman

The Reason why Roosevelt did so much was that Democrats had an incredible period of control. The Democratic Party Controlled Congress is what gave us those great programs. Without them, Roosevelt would have achieved little.

[JDPriestly]

85. We now pay per capita about TWICE as much for health care as do others in the world who have

single payer systems.

http://www.pgpf.org/chart-archive/0006_health-care-oecd

That's from Pete Peterson, hardly an advocate for socialism.

Medicare's administrative costs are lower than those of private insurance companies.

We need single payer.

We will as individuals save money if we get a single payer system.

As for the increase in the payroll tax, I'm retired, but it makes sense. New parents desperately need family leave. That is such an important time in a family's lives.

If we get a raise in the minimum wage -- hopefully $15 per hour, but even chintzy Hillary will go for $12 per hour, then we can easily afford to increase our contributions through payroll taxes to pay for family leave for new parents.

As I understand it, Hillary wants to impose the cost of paying for family leave on employers. THAT is the bill that will not pass through Congress. Besides, it will hurt the women of child-bearing age who compete with men in the hiring process if employers immediately think they can avoid paying for family leave if they hire the man with equally good qualifications.

Hillary's plans are horrible. She is not dealing realistically and honestly with these issues.

But then what can you expect?

Her loyalties are to her donors, not to ordinary Americans.

Feel the Bern! Bernie is right on this issue.

[Douglas Carpenter]

43. I already have a lot in various privately funded deductions. I would certainly agree with

replacing much of that with higher taxes if it meant having what most citizens of modern western democracies have had for more than a generation.

I realize that neither Bernie or anyone else can transform the United States into a modern western democracy over night and probably not in one term. But we can start moving in that direction only if we elect someone who believes in it.

[CoffeeCat]

44. A tax would be a welcome pay increase for our family!!!

This is what we pay now for health insurance.

$550 per month for our family. This plan has $40 copays, high deductibles and the coverage on many things is inadequate.

We are paying $$9,000 per year, PLUS if we go to the doctor for routine visits, sometimes the bills are in the hundreds of dollars.

My daughter just completed 6 physical therapy sessions for a back injury. The cost to us is $700 out of pocket.

Seriously.

I'm begging. Bring on the tax and get me out from under these health-insurance companies that are siphoning off so much of our income.

[Kalidurga]

45. You are one of those Democrats that Republicans complain about

Most people know that it costs money to take care of people who can't for whatever reason take care of themselves. That is why we have people who are literally dying because they don't have health insurance. So, you don't want to pay for it so other people can live that is fine. But, please be up front about it.

[jeff47]

46. Oddly enough, I prefer to pay $5k in taxes instead of $10k in insurance premiums/deductible.

Call me weird, but I think paying a lot less means I'm paying a lot less. Even when you call it "taxes".

[Doctor_J]

48. yeah, my monthly for healthcare is now $6000 for myself and Mrs. The proposed tax hike

Last edited Sat Nov 21, 2015, 06:30 PM - Edit history (1)

would probably be 1/10th of that. Maybe the hillarians don't understand that, or don't think $5400/month is a big deal.

Eta: plus my neighbor who got laid off after 25 years at the local excavation contractor would also have healthcare.

[Doctor_J]

47. how many of you Clinton supporters are willing to have 30 million remain without healthcare,

While we as a nation pay three times as much per capita as any other country?

[Karma13612]

53. so true

I mean, Hillary just wants to "tweak" the ACA.

This is her way of reassuring the for-profit insurance companies that she is going to keep their greedy gravy train habit going for as long as she is the Triangulator-in-Chief

[Rosa Luxemburg]

51. Yes. I'm paying far too much for health insurance

[Glorfindel]

52. Absolutely!

I know it's not part of the question, but I'd also support really slashing the military budget.

[RichVRichV]

55. For paid family leave? I'm in! n/t

[azmom]

56. It's the moral thing to do.

If I have to pay more taxes in order to fund programs that will create a healthier more educated society, I will gladly pay them. There are so many ways humanity would be better off.

[tk2kewl]

57. Yes I will pay more. Glad you asked. Too bad you didn't create a poll.

[Scootaloo]

58. I will pay an extra 2% if it leads to everyone getting equal access to good health care

Especially as it'll end up being a net decrease in costs overall.

[Sherman A1]

59. Count me as a yes

I think it is a good idea and the amount is really not all that much.

[LiberalArkie]

61. I would have when I was working. I am sure the last tax cut I got was $100 a month

That could have gone a long way to better healthcare. It would have gone a long way for childhood health care. Any caring person would gladly pay a little more to help those in need.

[riderinthestorm]

63. Yes! It would be transformative nt

[deutsey]

65. It's time to exorcise ourselves of voodoo economics and failed trickle down theory

and have a progressive tax rate with the wealthy and corporations paying their fair share along with everyone else.

Rebuild our infrastructure and employ the unemployed through works programs, make college and healthcare affordable, fund alternative energy and ways to diminish climate change and help vulnerable areas defend themselves against catastrophic weather events.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

66. Fine by me.

We're already paying a lot of taxes that aren't income, and don't get a lot in return for them. I'd be perfectly fine paying higher taxes to actually do something worthwhile, as opposed to supporting more chickenhawk's wars in the Middle East.

[WDIM]

67. Tax me the $200 dollars i pay per month for healthcare

and supply universal healthcare for all im down.

tax the corporations to fund the education of their work force.

remove the caps from social security and medicare. all income should be taxable for these vital services.

at the same time prosecute embezzlement like what we have seen with the defense department and defense contractors. end wasteful spending and pay true market prices

at the same time cut defense spending by 75%

at the same time legalize herbs and plants and allow the sale and taxation.

lets get this country going again. infrastructure and technology especially in the renewable energy field. free wireless electricity for all. free wireless internet for all. innovation out of the box thinking lets make country a shining example of freedom and equality.

[sarge43]

68. Pay a few more dollars a year to fund much needed social programs?

Yes. I'm not a Republican or even Republican lite.

[tkmorris]

69. Damned right I do

It's about time someone had the guts to say this.

BTW as an alternative there is already a movement which desires to CUT taxes for everyone. They don't seem entirely rational to me but hey, I'm a live and let live kinda guy. I forget what they're called but they seem to believe they are Taxed Enough Already, if that helps.

[Babel_17]

70. I'll even pay a bit more to care for the refugees we created ...

I'll even pay a bit more to care for the refugees we created as a result of creating chaos in Iraq.

And I know all kinds of Democrats would support doing the right thing by them.

[Boomer]

71. I can afford it

I may not be part of the 1% but I'm getting by pretty well. I'm willing to pay more to get this country back on track.

[cui bono]

72. Did even listen to the video you posted? It's a FANTASTIC PRO-Bernie piece! Thanks!!!

He wants the 1% to pay a higher percentage of their income (all income) in taxes.

He wants to close loopholes and not let them hide their money overseas.

Yes, all people will probably pay a little more in taxes - but proportionally far less than the increase the 1% will get - but in return, the people will get paid leave of absences, free higher education and health care. So that's a net gain.

What is the problem with this?

[corkhead]

73. Buy a lottery ticket

I just rec'd one of your threads

[Babel_17]

74. lol, ...

and you made me kick it.

[kath]

75. Well, it would be a hell of a lot cheaper to be taxed to pay for REAL universal healthcare, rather

Than have to pay ridiculously high premiums to some fucking parasite insurance company AND have to pay huge deductibles before you can even use your insurance.

[stage left]

76. I support it.

And would be happy, if I were working still, to pay a little more in taxes in exchange for such things as single payer, paid parental leave, paid sick days, etc. Or even for steps in that direction.

[cantbeserious]

77. Yes - I Support Single Payer - Yes I Support Taxes

eom

[Warren DeMontague]

78. It's worth it to get our shit together.

"Business as usual" is more expensive in the long run.

Hillary wants to throw 10 Billion more at the failed drug war, and supports the continual spending of taxpayer dollars to go after people for smoking pot. How much is that gonna cost you?

[woodsprite]

79. Count me in! n/t

[Live and Learn]

81. Count me in. I will happily pay more to have a better educated, healthy, inclusive and

fair society.

[lumberjack_jeff]

82. Does his platform eliminate other costs I currently experience? Does it raise my pay?

Most of us have a good enough grasp of 4th grade math to evaluate this ourselves without the prevaricating HRS spin.

My wife's employer pays $1100 monthly for our insurance. She'd get a big raise if it was provided via taxes.

[RoccoR5955]

83. If my healthcare costs go down

to the cost of the tax increase or less, it would be fine by me.

[eggplant]

86. Absolutely. Next question? n/t

[bigwillq]

87. I support it (nt)

[forest444]

88. Please, and thank you.

Considering what his plan is offering all of us in return, this shouldn't be controversial.

Of course, the media will be sure to make it so nevertheless.

[MisterP]

89. by now even the exurbs would rather have some taxes on the middle class than not HAVE a middle

class at all: they don't like NAFTA or Uberization like they did in 1996, back when the computer was about to cure all our problems and provide infinite and infinitely-safe investments

The telecosm launches us beyond the fuzzy electrons and frozen pathways of the microcosm to a boundless realm of infinite undulations. Beyond the copper cages of existing communications, the telecosm dissolves the topography of old limits and brings technology into a boundless elastic new universe, fashioned from incandescent oceans of bits on the electromagnetic spectrum.

. . . The telecosm can even banish all the glass and unveil new cathedrals of light and air alone.

[Iggo]

90. Yep!

[NRaleighLiberal]

91. Sure!

[SunSeeker]

94. The problem with DU polls is they are not representative of Dems, let alone the country. nt

[Jack Rabbit]

95. !!

It's better than the taxes we pay now that go to bail out gamblers in Wall Street casinos and leave us so little bang for out bucks.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

96. It this supposed to be the big "gotcha" that ends Bernie's campaign?

[George II]

98. That's a great way to fight the 1%, isn't it? Tax the 99%.

[TBF]

99. Our filing status is self-employed and we are willing

to pay as long as it goes to programs benefiting people rather than killing people (ie drones etc). Right now we pay an incredible amount in taxes just to prop up the absolutely bloated defense budget, not to mention the bailing out of the investment banks. I'm opposed to the continuation of that.

[valerief]

100. A little more in taxes vs. a LOT less in bills? Sure thing! nt

[MADem]

101. Horrible idea. It will go over like a lead balloon.

Pair that up with his fifteen buck pay raise, and that "raise" will go towards paying that payroll tax.

AND...joy of joys....the higher wages (even if you don't see them) will shove some people into a higher tax bracket, requiring them to pay more income tax.

The hurrider they go, the behinder they get.

Pie in the sky. Terribly regressive, too--rich people don't get paychecks, so they won't be paying into this scheme at all. It falls heaviest on the poor bums who wait for Friday when the eagle flies.

[SusanCalvin]

103. Fine. nt

[TSIAS]

106. I'm ok with it

It might not be the best politics (see: Mondale), but on principle I agree with him.

[Ned_Devine]

109. I do

[malokvale77]

110. I am absolutely on board.

We all deserve nice things.

It's a shame that so many so called Democrats have become as mean spirited and bigoted as the Republicans.

[kacekwl]

112. Please do.

[Paka]

115. K&R

You pay less and get more. Sounds like a good deal to me. Or even if it is more, when you get more in return, it's still a good deal.

GO BERNIE!!!

[Half-Century Man]

116. Yes.

The overall costs for medical coverage will drop once the parasites are purged from the system, single payer can negotiate drug costs, standardization of procedural costs specific to each region, Admin cost drop from 20%of costs to 8%-5% of costs, etc.

[AgingAmerican]

117. We would pay less than we pay now

And we would get something for our money besides war.

[mike_c]

118. I do....

Yes, I would happily pay some additional taxes to fund social programs that undercut the greedy for-profit corporations and other parasites that suck the economic life blood from us now. Higher taxes for single payer health care that drives the insurance companies into oblivion? Take my money, please. Higher taxes for publicly funded higher education and freedom from a lifetime of debt? I pay nearly $1,000 monthly to student loan vultures. I'd gladly pay every dime of it in taxes to create free public higher education instead. Need I go on? I will absolutely pay higher taxes to create an equitable society in the U.S. Happily.

[katsy]

119. Yep.

And it won't be paying more really. Our taxes will be more efficiently allocated and everyone will benefit.

[blackspade]

121. I do.

I'll pay a little more so that one of my coworkers can stay home with her baby.
It would have been nice if my family had had that option, but I definitely support it going forward.

[fbc]

122. I support this plan

[TIME TO PANIC]

124. I support it.

[wendylaroux]

126. I care about others,

of course I would support this.

[guillaumeb]

128. Are you Taxed Enough Already?

Perhaps you need to find a Tea Party to attend.

[guillaumeb]

130. A question to all on DU who are reading this post:

Has the poster actually responded to anyone yet in the 6 plus hours since the initial post, or is the poster merely trying to start a fire?

[Duckhunter935]

150. They also started about four other threads

Trying to stir up trouble

[snort]

132. Yah, right? I'm comfy, dammit!

Fuck 'em! Give them that and they'll start expecting other things, like food. I'd rather kick a man in the street!

[Promethean]

133. Recced to make the thread's comments more visible.

I also would gladly pay more if someone I trusted, like Sanders, was directing the money.

[juxtaposed]

135. tax me 60% and i'll be happy not paying for walmart (HRC) ppl. she left to the sharks.

[Kip Humphrey]

136. Gladly. And I'll gladly pay higher taxes to enable healthcare for everyone, free college tuition

for everyone including the 1%. Furthermore, I agree to pay more for goods and services so that all Americans earn a living wage ($15/hr @ 2010 dollars), and higher social security contributions to ensure all seniors and disabled enjoy the equivalent of a living wage ($15.hr @2010 dollars) as well, and to lower the Social Security full vesting retirement age to 60 for 5 years as a jobs and prosperity stimulus, after which returning full vested retirement age to 65 where it once was.

[Wilms]

137. :D

[DefenseLawyer]

138. Not everyone is a supply-sider

Yes that "cut everyone's taxes it solves all our problems" line sounds so damn good. That's why so many people buy it. But anyone who's not an idiot (no offense) can see that we've been praying at the alter of Milton Friedman for 40 years and it's ruined us.

[BainsBane]

139. I don't mind paying more taxes, but I want a progressive tax structure

The payroll tax is regressive.

[freedom fighter jh]

141. Regressive it is.

The cap is what makes it regressive. Bernie wants to lift the cap.

[Hepburn]

140. I do. n/t

[freedom fighter jh]

142. I can't afford to pay more than I'm paying now . . .

. . . but I could afford a pretty substantial hike if I didn't have to pay health insurance premiums.

[Scuba]

143. This thread reminds me of when Republicans ask for input on Twitter.

[denbot]

144. I'm in!

No problem

[Fearless]

145. I agree with Bernie's plan.

[Luciferous]

147. I would pay more.

[fredamae]

152. I don't mind at all

I am willing to pay a bit more to help more.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

153. I do.

[AtomicKitten]

154. I do. Proudly. It's the right thing to do.

[TeddyR]

155. 35% tax

On all tax payers, regardless of income levels. Everyone paying the same percentage of income seems fair.

[Blue_In_AK]

156. I support it.

So you pay a little more in taxes and get benefits that cost less. It doesn't seem like a difficult concept. I trust Bernie not to use the increased tax revenue to beef up the military.

[sorechasm]

160. Let's see, endless Healthcare for All vs. endless Warfare for All. Both will require higher taxes.

I'll take Healthcare choice thank you since:
- It will cost less in the long run.
- Allow folks to choose more productive careers.
- Better for small businesses.
- Relieve needless suffering.
- Countless benefits of a society free from the fraudulent medical insurance industry.

[stevenleser]

161. A middle class tax increase is death in a general election. Even if he goes back on it between now

and then, if by some crazy happenstance he ends up being the nominee, this will add on to all his other problems.

[Jamaal510]

163. This is one of

the few times I don't see eye to eye with him. I don't like this plan as someone who comes from a poor family.