On Thursday, The New York Times ran a story going through Democrat presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren’s proposed socialist initiatives and where they will be funded.
In the article, the writers contend that Warren’s pie-in-the-sky plans are “far-reaching” and will increase government spending by roughly fifty percent.
For universal childcare, increased spending on public schools, and free college, the New York Times explains that the funds would come from a “wealth tax” of those making over $50 million, but “how much revenue that tax would generate is a matter of debate.”
To pay for Warren’s pricey “climate change” agenda, she would create a new tax on corporate profits and reverse the Republican’s “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” which lowered burdensome taxes on companies, so they could grow by giving bonuses to employees and hiring more workers.
For Warren’s increase to social security (which is already bankrupt as it is), she plans to “to pay for her plan, she would raise investment and payroll taxes on high earners,” says the New York Times, not specifying what level is “high” in their eyes.
To “build more affordable housing,” Warren will expand the death tax, so people inheriting their relatives’ estates (which have already been taxed), will be taxed even more by the government.
For Warren’s unspecified spending on “a variety of other issues) totaling $410 billion, Warren would be financed by eliminating tax benefits for inherited assets, forcing people to fork over more money when their relatives pass away.
But the biggest plan Elizabeth Warren would need to finance is the ugly beast known as “Medicare for All” or “socialized medicine,” delivering low-quality medicine en masse to Americans, who would be forced to pay for it, and not have a private option, even if they wanted.
The New York Times admits Warren’s “ price tag relies on aggressive assumptions and is lower than several estimates from other experts…. Even still, that’s twice the estimated cost of her other proposals.”
To fund the horrific proposal, Warren would tax new employers (also known as punishing new business owners), INCREASING LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME TAXES ON EVERYONE, saying that people would get paid more because they won’t have to pay for insurance (yeah right), and Warren’s favorite line, “taxing the wealthy,” even though that would only bring in a meager $3 trillion for her $20+ trillion proposal. She’d also increase taxes on businesses that employ millions of Americans (so they would likely have to cut staff) and increase taxes on stock trading (that means everyone’s 401ks).
But wait, there’s more…
The New York Times alleges that because Warren will loosen immigration laws so that there are open borders, criminal aliens will now miraculously pay income taxes, so there’s an extra $400 billion in revenues (good luck with that).
Warren would also keep us less safe by cutting Military spending by nearly $800 billion dollars.
The New York Times does contend, however, that Warren’s “math relies on assumptions that are far from assured, such as the extent to which the richest Americans would pay her wealth tax rather than dodge it.”
It seems the Democrat frontrunner is now taking criticism from the Left, and it doesn’t look good.