CDZ How Does Sanders Plan to Pay for Free College Education?

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by JimBowie1958, Apr 3, 2016.

  1. 320 Years of History
    Offline

    320 Years of History Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,060
    Thanks Received:
    810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Ratings:
    +2,550
    The reason for not choosing either option 2 or 3 is risk. Because SSI is people's money that is effectively being managed by the government, and because unlike one's 401k funds, it must be there when folks retire, the risk profile of SSI cash cannot be such that the money may not be there when folks are entitled to begin receiving what is effectively their own money.

    The current investments of SSI, U.S. T-Bills is such that if that money cannot and will not be returned to SSI, there are bigger problems than whether folks, even many millions of folks, get their monthly SSI check. Also, even if folks were to accept a higher risk profile for their SSI money, and if as a result of their accepting that higher risk it occurs that they won't receive the SSI payment the program promises them, the country will still have an obligation to care for them under welfare and Medicaid.

    Moreover, not receiving their expected SSI payments because the money was invested in higher risk instruments that lost rather than gained value leaves the SSI beneficiaries/recipients without money they expected to have available to pay their bills. At that point it doesn't matter whether those folks have an obligation to pay for their electricity, water, food, clothing, etc., if there's simply no money to give to their creditors, the creditors have to write off the debt and move on. You can't get blood from a turnip, no matter how hard you try.

    That just increases costs for businesses, costs that get passed on folks who are to greater and lesser extents not depending entirely on their SSI payments. You see all the harganging and griping about paying the small pittance share of one's taxes that go to SNAP and other assistance programs today. Imagine what you'd hear were the situation compounded by having to make up for the shortfall in actual cash received by SSI recipients who agreed to accept higher risk profiles and lost rather than made out. We'd find ourselves in outright and open revolt by the masses. That won't be good for anyone, not even and least of all the revolting masses.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. rdean
    Online

    rdean Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
  3. 320 Years of History
    Offline

    320 Years of History Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,060
    Thanks Received:
    810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Ratings:
    +2,550
    Well, they can/could, except perhaps Mr. Buchanan. None of those individuals are the right wingers whom I had I mind when I read your remarks.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. rdean
    Online

    rdean Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Without any links, it's all speculation, or in this case, conspiracy.
     
  5. 320 Years of History
    Offline

    320 Years of History Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,060
    Thanks Received:
    810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Ratings:
    +2,550
    You know, I'm going to tell you quite directly. I've about had it with needing to provide links that illustrate elementary economics principles to the folks on this forum, most especially links for things one can look up and research on one's own. You want links, I suggest you begin with the ones I've provided all over the place on this forum.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Unkotare
    Offline

    Unkotare Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2011
    Messages:
    69,821
    Thanks Received:
    5,431
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Ratings:
    +15,639

    Wow, such vitriol from someone afraid to post anywhere but the CDZ.
     
  7. 320 Years of History
    Offline

    320 Years of History Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2015
    Messages:
    6,060
    Thanks Received:
    810
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    Ratings:
    +2,550
    It's not a scam, but as Politifact notes, neither is Wall Street, or a tax on Wall Street speculation, going to pay for the entirety of his proposal. Moreover, states' participation in his proposal isn't a foregone conclusion, no matter how much it may be in their interest to participate. Thus the "mostly false" assessment Politifact gave is reasonable.

    The thing that neither Politifact, nor Mr. Sanders, nor many other folks mention is that taxing Wall Street and requiring state contributions aren't the only means by which the program could be financed. Eliminating most of the corporate subsidies accorded in the tax code would pay for the program and require no state contributions or tax increases. Make no mistake, however. Such a financing method cannot be floated during a political campaign, no matter how populist be the general mentality of the nation during the campaign.

    That approach cannot be floated at this time because like any program of the nature Mr. Sanders has proposed re: paying for college, it must be drawn up and passed as a Congressional bill. Until he knows the makeup of the Congress that must pass such legislation, publicly proposing such an radical (from the perspective of corporate America) isn't going to do much of anything except ensure Mrs. Clinton becomes the Democratic nominee.

    Make no mistake, such an idea may well gain traction if Sanders gets elected. It kills many birds with one stone:
    • shifts the largest segment of each taxpayer's existing tax payment away from corporations and to individual voters
    • provides individual voters with something that can never be taken from them once they get it and that will be beneficial to them and their children for as long as they live
    • doesn't ask taxpayers to pay one cent more than they already pay
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Apr 7, 2016
  8. rdean
    Online

    rdean Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Republicans who believe in trickle down and think "supply and demand" is a wild liberal theory can't teach economic. Unless it's kind of a "comedy economics routine".
     
  9. xband
    Offline

    xband Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2016
    Messages:
    2,862
    Thanks Received:
    299
    Trophy Points:
    140
    Ratings:
    +1,317
    Pay college professors minimum wage is how Sanders is going to pay for it. In a communist society everyone makes the same wage; doctors, lawyers and ditch diggers, the communist state owns all the land.
     
  10. Fishlore
    Offline

    Fishlore Silver Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    936
    Thanks Received:
    170
    Trophy Points:
    90
    Location:
    New Hampshire USA
    Ratings:
    +446
    Why not remove the cap and let people have a choice of three options:
    1. Letting it stay in the same program management scheme it is in. No change for that person at all.

    2. Allowing people to manage their SS funds like a 401k. the money is invested by people at the Social Security Administration who would hire the best portfolio managers and hedge fund managers to do so. Downside to this, of course, is that Congress cant keep borrowing from these funds, but I think Congress should ween itself off of Social Security funds any way.

    3. A hybrid option of taking some Social Security funds out an managing them like a 401k and also leaving however much they want to in the system.[/QUOTE]

    This is a radical idea and one which makes me wonder about how deeply opponent of Social Security have thought through their proposals. Allowing the federal government to play the stock market would, of course, expose beneficiaries to the sort of risks the program was intended to avoid. Even more strange is the fact that having such a multi-billion dollar player in the market every day would result in situation in which the federal government swiftly became the major stock holder in a very large number of publicly held corporations. Such a a development would take the USA far, far beyond the democratic socialism advocated by Sen. Sanders and practiced in Scandinavian countries. We would have an economy structured like North Korea's. Good thinking, guys!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page