I'll leave it to the "bean counters" aka smart people knowledgeable in govt accounting aka GAO to tell us if it covers what Sen Sanders says it covers. I doubt I'll be disappointed.

On Medicare too so little change for me. Kind wish I was in the 52% group.

I am not opposed to this. But, my plan would be to go in 20k increments until you hit 200k then go in 50 k increments. And I would not raise rates for anyone under 150 k, but I would lower the rate for several groups under that. For example someone making 60k would pay 12% under my plan. But, I would go for 30% on people making more than 150k. I would go 40% for those over 250k. And finally those in the group over 10 million I would go for at least 58%, but I could be persuaded that up to 75% is the way to go.

I would rather keep the part where I lower taxes on those making less than 30k. That is if it was my choice. People in that income range spend money when they have it, so I see it as a way to help the economy grow.

That's usually a Republican trick...

Sanders's plan raises Medicare levies by IIRC 2.2% for workers and 6.7% for their employers.

Right now, workers pay 6.2% of their salaries to Social Security (and their employers pay another 6.2%), and 1.45% to Medicare (again, matched by their employers), so someone making $18,000 pays 17.65% in taxes, not 10%. Under Sanders's plan that goes to 19.85%, with employers paying 23.35% of their employees salary as payroll levies.

For reasons that can best be described as "craven politics", these levies are generally not described as "taxes", and not included in whether or not a plan "raises taxes".

and no health insurance payment. More than a fair tradeoff. For both employees and business owners.

Using the 'raising taxes' bugaboo without acknowledging the real savings in the plan is disingenuous.

Thanks for answering, I didn't know what you meant by payroll levies.

I'm not sure what you mean by "he should be up-front about it". His plan is very clearly put forth.

to supplement Medicare.

I know there's some hand-waving about eliminating copays and deductibles in the expansion, but until somebody crunches out how much that would actually cost (it would be a lot) there's no real sense discussing it.

And so the tax raise is not moot to the discussion. If there are no copays or deductibles then folks on Medicare are pretty much taken care of. Better than they are now.

If you are not retired and not on Medicare you and your employer are probably now paying much more in insurance premiums, deductibles and copays than any tax increase that would replace those things.

I don't think the math is all that obtuse. The numbers HAVE been crunched by Politifact, amonst others, and have been posted here.

In case you honestly haven't seen it, here: http://usuncut.com/news/bernie-sanders-healthcare-plan-would-save-the-average-american-family-1200/


http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jan/13/how-much-would-bernie-sanders-health-care-plan-cos/

Honk--------------------for a political revolution

Bernie 2016

The only tweaks I'd make are enacting a 35% (rather than 37%) for those earning $250-411k, and a top marginal rate of 48% (rather than 52%).

Letting the top marginal rate rise above 50% has its merits; but it's just bad optics, and gives the GOP an easy attack line: "Sanders would tax more than half your income." And yes, they would say "your" income - and the Archie Bunkers making $40k would buy it.

48% on all taxable income above $2 million would accomplish the same thing, and would just be easier to market.

Get'er done, Bernie!

but we need to add a wealth tax - 3% on wealth above $100,000,000 - dedicated to the debt

estate tax - dedicated to clean energy conversion

... than Bernie is now, as Bernie thoughtfully pointed out in the debates earlier.

Republicans of course will over time be asked to either say they hate Ike now, or that they love him, and they've made a big mistake moving towards fascism instead since his time in the White House.