• About WordPress
    • WordPress.org
    • Documentation
    • Support
    • Feedback
  • Log In
  • Register
↓
 

The Progressive Wing

You Are The Revolution

  • Home
    • About Us
      • Contact Us
      • FAQ
    • Members
  • Candidates
  • Organizations
  • Media
Home→Categories Bernie Sanders - Page 2

Category Archives: Bernie Sanders

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →

5/11 News Roundup & OT

The Progressive Wing Posted on May 11, 2021 by BennyMay 11, 2021

Bonjour! Let’s star the thread with an op-ed by Pramila Jayapal and Bernie Sanders Concerning Medicare
We must fix the gaping holes in Medicare

More than 55 years ago, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Medicare — one of the most popular and successful government programs in our nation’s history — into law. Before the enactment of Medicare, about half of our senior citizens were uninsured and roughly 35 percent lived in poverty. Today, everyone in America aged 65 or older is guaranteed health-care benefits through Medicare regardless of income or medical condition, while the official poverty rate for seniors is now less than 9 percent.

That is the good news. The bad news is that, since its inception in 1965, Medicare has not covered such basic health-care needs as hearing, dental care and vision. The result: Millions of senior citizens have teeth rotting in their mouths, are unable to hear what their children and grandchildren say or can’t read a newspaper because of failing eyesight. It is a cruel irony that older Americans do not have coverage for these benefits at the time when they need it the most.

The lack of benefits for hearing, dental and vision has severe consequences for worsening a whole host of other medical conditions. Researchers at Johns Hopkins found that mild hearing loss doubled dementia risk. Moderate loss tripled risk, and people with a severe hearing impairment were five times more likely to develop dementia. Aging affects teeth as well, as gum tissue naturally recedes exposing roots to decay and infection. Poor oral health and untreated gum disease leads to increased serious risk of heart attacks, strokes, rheumatoid arthritis and worsened diabetes. Aging also takes a toll on vision, leading to injury, cognitive impairment and depression.

And yet, in the richest country in the world, the outrageous reality is that 75 percent of senior citizens who suffer from hearing loss do not have a hearing aid because of the prohibitive cost. Sixty-five percent of senior citizens have no dental insurance and no idea how they will be able to afford to go to a dentist. More than a quarter of senior citizens in this country are missing all of their natural teeth, with many unable to properly digest the food that they eat. Over 70 percent of Americans 65 and older have untreated gum disease. We simply cannot tolerate this any longer.

The original vision of Medicare was to provide quality health-care coverage to our nation’s seniors. Today, it’s past time to fix the gaping holes that are the lack of coverage for dental, vision and hearing, which are so critical, especially as we age. We must do what the overwhelming majority of Americans want us to do: expand Medicare to cover hearing aids, dental care and eyeglasses.

But expanding benefits is not the only thing we need to do. Too many older workers are uninsured or underinsured, which is why we must lower the eligibility age for Medicare to at least 60. Doing so would give 23 million older workers the security of knowing they can finally address illness and injury and not worry about how they will pay for a doctor. This is not only the right thing to do from a public policy perspective; it is also what the overwhelming majority of Americans support. That’s why we are joined by over 100 colleagues in the House and the Senate — including those in some of the most vulnerable districts in the country — who last month asked President Biden to include these critical proposals in his American Families Plan.

Expanding Medicare and lowering the eligibility age will cost money. So, how are we going to pay for it? There is an easy, popular and necessary answer: by taking on the greed of the pharmaceutical industry and demanding that it stops ripping off U.S. taxpayers by charging us the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. Medicare and the rest of the federal government should do what Veterans Affairs already does, and what every major country on Earth does: negotiate with pharmaceutical companies to lower the outrageously high price of prescription drugs. It is a travesty that in the United States, one vial of insulin has gone from costing $21 in 1999 to $332 in 2019, reflecting a price increase of more than 1,000 percent.

By setting drug prices at the median price of other major countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany and France, the Congressional Budget Office estimates we’ll save taxpayers at least $500 billion over a 10-year period. Additional cost-saving measures can raise the total saved to at least $650 billion. With those savings, we can finally make drug prices affordable for all Americans, give Americans over 60 the security of having Medicare, and expand the benefits that Medicare provides to include dental, vision and hearing. Let’s do what is wildly popular with the American people and get this done.

More perspectives, news, tweets, videos, etc in the comments.

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread | Tagged health care, Medicare, Pramila Jayapal

5/4 News Roundup & OT

The Progressive Wing Posted on May 4, 2021 by BennyMay 4, 2021

Here’s Bernie’s interview on All In With Chris Hayes last night to get the thread started.

More perspectives, tweets, news, etc in the comments. There’s also a special b-day for one of the birdies !

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread, Video

4/30 TGIF Open Thread

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 30, 2021 by BennyApril 30, 2021

Everybody join in!🎶🥳 pic.twitter.com/L1pNXnvrq0

— Brown Eyed Susan (@smc429) April 30, 2021

More news, perspectives, tweets, etc in the comments.

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread

4/29 News Roundup and Open Thread

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 29, 2021 by BennyApril 29, 2021

Let’s start the day with Bernie’s appearance on The Late Show after POTUS Joint Address:

(Beginning of the interview)

(part 2)

More videos, tweets, perspectives, news, etc in the comments. See you there!

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Video | Tagged Joe Biden

Chair of the Budget Committee… (gets more done) and OT April 28, 2021

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 28, 2021 by polarbear4April 28, 2021

Study Commissioned by Sanders Shows US Pays 2 to 4 Times More for Prescription Drugs Than Other Nations

A new government study commissioned by Sen. Bernie Sanders shows that the U.S. pays two to four times more for prescription drugs than other rich countries, a finding that came as President Joe Biden rolled out a social safety-net plan on Wednesday that excludes progressive proposals to tackle sky-high medicine costs.

According to an analysis (pdf) by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), retail prices that U.S. consumers and insurers paid for 20 brand-name prescription drugs in 2020 were 2.82 times higher than in Canada, 4.25 times higher than in Australia, and 4.36 times higher than in France.

“We can no longer tolerate the American people paying, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs.”
—Sen. Bernie Sanders

The drugs GAO examined were a sampling of 41 brand-name medicines with the highest expenditures and use in the Medicare Part D program, which under current federal law is prohibited from negotiating prices with pharmaceutical companies.

One example GAO cites is Xarelto, a blood clot medication that costs more than $558 for 30 tablets in the U.S. but just over $85 in Canada.

“This important GAO study confirms what we all already know: the pharmaceutical industry is ripping off the American people,” Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. “The time is long overdue for the United States to do what every major country on earth does: negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies to lower the outrageous price of prescription drugs. ”

The Vermont senator went on to urge Biden to “put this proposal in the American Families Plan and use the savings to expand and improve Medicare for older Americans.”

“We can no longer tolerate the American people paying, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs,” said Sanders.

Despite pressure from Sanders and other progressive lawmakers, Biden’s $1.8 trillion American Families Plan leaves out proposals to lower the Medicare eligibility age and allow the federal government to directly negotiate prescription drug prices, ideas that are both overwhelmingly popular with the U.S. public.

“The proposal is incomplete without long-overdue measures to make prescription drugs more affordable for every person, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much money they have in their bank account.”
—Margarida Jorge, Lower Drug Prices Now

Sanders told reporters Tuesday that drug-pricing reforms and Medicare expansion will end up in the final legislation “if I have anything to say about it.” Because it is unlikely to receive any Republican support, the package will probably have to go through the filibuster-proof budget reconciliation process—over which Sanders has significant influence as chair of the Senate Budget Committee.

A White House fact sheet outlining the details of Biden’s new proposal states that the president is committed to lowering prescription drug costs “for everyone by letting Medicare negotiate prices” and giving people the option “to enroll in Medicare at age 60″—just not as part of the American Families Plan.

Margarida Jorge, campaign director for Lower Drug Prices Now, said in a statement Wednesday morning that “while the American Families Plan includes investments that directly respond to the urgent needs of millions of families, the proposal is incomplete without long-overdue measures to make prescription drugs more affordable for every person, no matter who they are, where they live, or how much money they have in their bank account.”

“Lowering drug prices for seniors, people with disabilities, and patients struggling to afford everything from insulin to cancer medications is a top healthcare priority for millions of Americans who can’t wait anymore for accessible life-saving medicines,” said Jorge. “Biden has repeatedly affirmed his commitment to lowering drug prices as part of making healthcare affordable for everyone. The time to act on that promise is now.”
____________________________

Hoping we can put enough pressure on. But at least it’s getting out there, more and more.

Posted in Bernie Sanders, Open Thread

4/13 News Roundup & OT

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 13, 2021 by BennyApril 13, 2021

Biden Wants to Spend More Than Trump to Maintain a Bloated Defense Budget

Robert Reich knows a thing or two about federal budgets, and the economist who has served in three presidential administrations says there is something wrong with Joe Biden’s plan to increase Pentagon spending above the levels proposed by former President Trump.

“The Pentagon already spends: $740,000,000,000 every year, $2,000,000,000 every day, $1,000,000 every minute,” says the former secretary of labor. “The last thing we need is a bigger military budget.”

Unfortunately, that’s what the president is seeking. This has led Reich to announce that he is “frankly disappointed that Biden’s proposing $715 billion for the Pentagon—an increase over Trump’s $704 billion defense budget—instead of moving back toward Obama-Biden era levels of defense spending, or less.”

How Antidiscrimination Law Fails Black Mothers
“Or less” is the right direction, especially at a moment when Republican deficit hawks are circling in preparation for attacks on domestic spending that is essential for working families who have been battered by the coronavirus pandemic.

Biden’s $1.5 trillion budget plan has much to recommend it. The president is seeking significant increases in funding for education and proposing to invest in criminal justice and police reform, combating gun violence, and other worthy efforts. “However, despite the positive investments in these programs,” says Representative Barbara Lee, “I was incredibly disappointed at the significant increase in Pentagon spending to even higher levels than the Trump administration. With so many people across the country struggling to make ends meet, the last thing we need to do is increase investment in wasteful Pentagon spending.” Noting that “this budget adds twelve billion new dollars for weapons of war,” the longtime critic of endless wars asks us to “just think how that same amount could be used to invest in jobs, health care and fighting inequality—especially as we fight back a once in a century public health and economic crisis.”

Lee was once a lonely voice on behalf of cutting Pentagon spending. But the California Democrat now has allies in powerful places. “I have serious concerns,” says Senate Budget Committee chair Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), “about the proposed $753 billion budget request for the bloated Pentagon—a $12.3 billion increase compared to the last year of the Trump Administration. At a time when the U.S. already spends more on the military than the next 12 nations combined, it is time for us to take a serious look at the massive cost over-runs, the waste and fraud that currently exists at the Pentagon.”

Congressional Progressive Caucus chair Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) is blunter: “We’re in the midst of a crisis that has left millions of families unable to afford food, rent, and bills. But at the same time, we’re dumping billions of dollars into a bloated Pentagon budget. Don’t increase defense spending. Cut it—and invest that money into our communities.”

That’s not a radical response. When Data for Progress surveyed voters nationwide last year about budget priorities, 56 percent supported cutting the Pentagon budget by 10 percent to pay for fighting the coronavirus pandemic and funding education, health care, and housing. Sixty-nine percent of Democrats expressed enthusiasm for the proposed cut, which was striking. Even more striking was the 51 percent support it got from Republicans.

When the idea was raised in Congress in July of 2020, 93 members of the House of Representatives voted for a 10 percent cut, as did 23 senators. That wasn’t a win, obviously, but it was a groundbreaking show of support for reduced spending on the military-industrial complex.

Can congressional progressives build on that base of support to alter priorities in the Biden budget? It won’t be easy. Centrist Democrats will be cautious about cuts, and Republicans can be expected to demagogue the issue. But progressive caucus members have had success in pushing the new administration to abandon some of the worst Pentagon initiatives of the Trump years. For instance, a new letter signed by 70 House members commends Biden for “[his] first steps toward ending U.S. support for the war in Yemen, including announcing an end to U.S. military participation in offensive Saudi actions; a review of weapons sales to Saudi Arabia for use in its six-year air war in Yemen; and a revocation of President Trump’s terrorism designation against the Houthis, with the express purpose of averting a hunger crisis.” (The letter urges the president to go further and “use all available U.S. leverage with the Saudi regime to demand an immediate and unconditional end to its blockade, which threatens 16 million malnourished Yemenis living on the brink of famine.”)

One of the key movers in the fight to end US support for the war in Yemen, Representative Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), thinks the time is right to push the administration and Congress for a broader rethink of spending priorities.

“A proposed increase of $13 billion in defense spending is far too much given [the Pentagon budget’s] already rapid growth at a time of relative peace,” says the Wisconsin Democrat who with Lee cochairs the Defense Spending Reduction Caucus. “We cannot best build back better if the Pentagon’s budget is larger than it was under Donald Trump.”

Pocan has ideas for where to make cuts. For instance, he says “we must stop funding for former President Trump’s excessive $1.5 trillion nuclear modernization plan and complete a new nuclear posture review as each of the last three presidents have done. The United States has far more nuclear weapons than are needed for our security, so let’s stop funding the waste.” In addition to arguing for “no new spending on nuclear weapons,” Pocan points to the need to audit Pentagon waste and accountability measures to eliminate slush funds.

That’s a message that will resonate with the American people, says Representative Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.), who maintains that there is a growing awareness that “it is simply inexcusable to continue to shower weapons manufacturers with hundreds of billions of dollars in Pentagon waste.”

Advocacy groups share the view that this is precisely the right time for members of Congress to make the case for tightening the bloated Pentagon budget. “Following a year of deadly proof that throwing money at the Pentagon does not keep us safe from modern day threats, it is unconscionable to not only extend Trump’s spending spree, but to add to it,” says Win Without War’s Erica Fein. “Deadly pandemics, climate crisis, desperate inequality—the greatest threats to global security do not have military solutions. Yet while we’re repeatedly asked how we will afford to address these truly existential threats, the same question is never asked of adding to the Pentagon’s already-overstuffed coffers. Let’s be clear: continuing to funnel near-limitless resources into the pockets of arms manufacturers while underfunding public goods only undermines the safety of people in the United States and around the world.”

More news, tweets, videos, etc in the comments section.

Posted in Activism, Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread, Video | Tagged budget, Joe Biden, military

4/10-11 Weekend News Roundup & OT

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 10, 2021 by BennyApril 10, 2021

Let’s get started with an interview with Stephanie Kelton on MSNBC last Night:

Speaking of, Prof Kelton is on Barron’s Top 100 Women in US Finance list.

“There is a very fundamental rethink happening in the way lawmakers are approaching the federal budget-making process,” Stephanie Kelton, 51, tells Barron’s. “They used to start from the premise that every bill should be deficit neutral. That’s changing.”

That’s a consequence, in no small part, of the persistent advocacy of Kelton, a professor of economics and public policy at Stony Brook University and the author of The Deficit Myth: Modern Monetary Theory and the Birth of the People’s Economy, published in 2020. Her goal is to “replace a fake financial constraint with a real inflation constraint” in the minds of policy makers.

She seems to be making progress. When Congress swiftly passed the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan in March, just a few months after passing a $900 billion pandemic relief package at the end of December, there was little debate about the impact on the debt. Instead, the arguments focused on whether the economy would “overheat” in response to the extra money, leading to excessive inflation.

Even so, the Biden administration’s recent proposal to pay for a temporary boost in infrastructure spending with a permanent increase in corporate profit taxes suggests that Kelton still has her work cut out for her.

More videos, tweets, news, analysis in the comments section.

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread | Tagged Budgets, MMT, Stephanie Kelton

4/8 News Roundup and Open Thread

The Progressive Wing Posted on April 7, 2021 by BennyApril 8, 2021

Biden Can Go Bigger and Not ‘Pay for It’ the Old Way

Last week, President Biden introduced a $2.2 trillion infrastructure plan, calling it “a once-in-a-generation investment in America.” In a speech, he outlined many of the package’s details, including how to “pay for” it. A close look at those so-called pay-fors, however, shows Democrats are thinking about fiscal responsibility the wrong way. They could be on the verge of sparking some unpleasant short-term overheating of the economy, in which price increases accelerate and the purchasing power of our dollars falls somewhat. And if the final legislation were to grow much larger — toward the $10 trillion level many progressives in Congress are pushing — it could send such inflation soaring.

In an interview on MSNBC last week, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York explained her mixed feelings about the president’s proposal, saying she has “serious concerns that it’s not enough to realize the very inspiring vision that Mr. Biden has advanced.” Rather than spending roughly $2 trillion over eight years, Ms. Ocasio Cortez and many of her Progressive Caucus colleagues would prefer “to go way higher” and on a shorter timeline.

She’s right that it is possible for Congress and the Biden administration to go bigger, faster — but only by shifting to a completely different budgeting framework: Instead of passing legislation that leans on taxing corporations and the rich to keep spending from increasing the deficit, they would have to develop a robust plan with a focus on containing inflationary pressures as that heightened government spending hits the real economy.

The president called his plan “fiscally responsible” during his speech simply because it will raise more revenue than what he’s proposing to spend. On paper, and according to conventional wisdom, this a balanced policy. It may satisfy the scorekeepers at the Congressional Budget Office or even earn high marks from deficit hawks. But because these proposed hikes fall exclusively on corporations and more affluent Americans — who have a relatively high marginal propensity to save rather than spend — the taxes may not diminish enough private sector spending to prevent the government’s own increased outlays from igniting some inflationary overheating, especially if Congress does “go way higher.”

The key to responsibly spending vast sums of money lies in carefully managing the economy’s real productive limitations. Just as my son’s Lego projects are limited by the amount of bricks we have bought for him, we can’t squeeze more goods and services out of our economy once we’ve made use of all available resources.

It’s easy to ramp up spending when there are millions of unemployed people who can be hired and plenty of domestic companies eager to supply the government with solar panels and electric vehicles. But what happens when it gets harder to find the idle things and people — construction workers, architects, machinery, raw materials and so on — needed to keep pace with an enormous revamp of our nation’s infrastructure? With the U.S. economy now improving, it would be irresponsible not to develop a rollout plan for those contingencies.

Many of Mr. Biden’s proposed tax increases should be defended, and even lauded, for they will promote greater fairness and curb inequality somewhat, but it must be recognized that they will do relatively little to offset spending pressures.

Depending on how big Congress ultimately decides to go on infrastructure, and how quickly, it may need to unleash a whole suite of inflation-dampening policies along the way — all of it unrelated to deficit neutrality.

These nontax inflation offsets could include industrial policies, like much more aggressively increasing our domestic manufacturing capacity by steering investment back to U.S. shores, using even more “carrot” incentives like direct federal procurement, grants and loans, as well as more “sticks” like levying new taxes to discourage the offshoring of plants. Reforming trade policies is another option: Repealing tariffs would make it easier and cheaper for American businesses to buy supplies manufactured abroad and easier for consumers to spend more of their income on products made outside of our borders, draining off some domestic demand pressures.

The Biden team could also consider loosening its legal-immigration policies, so that even once America nears full employment there would still be an adequate labor pool to meet the increased demand for workers. Putting aside the obvious climate benefits of tightening environmental regulations, banning fracking on federal lands and offshore drilling in federal waters could free up people and materials for other activities. Health care reform could have a role too. (Significantly lowering the Medicare eligibility age would sharply reduce aggregate spending in the health care industry, a major source of price pressures in the economy.)

Over time, the Biden plan’s investments in our physical and human infrastructure will enhance our economy’s productive capacity, leaving us with a better educated and more productive work force, more efficient railways, less congested roadways, improved technologies and much else. But this can’t happen overnight. It will take years, and it might mean that we start to run out of available capacity as we go — especially if the House Progressive Caucus wins the addition of trillions more dollars. No one can predict exactly when, or across which industries, serious bottlenecks and other shortages might emerge.

That’s why to avoid short-run constraints like supply bottlenecks, the U.S. government can look elsewhere for capacity. American businesses can make use of depressed conditions abroad, buying from countries with economies that might be struggling to fully recover from the economic downturn and that will be more than happy to mutually benefit from our boom. There will be no lack of eager foreign producers if we need to relieve some demand pressure on the domestic front.

So it was unfortunate that in his long-awaited infrastructure speech, President Biden promised “not a contract will go out, that I control” that isn’t for “a company that is an American company with American products, all the way down the line, and American workers.”

This “buy American” philosophy is well intentioned but could lead to counterproductive trouble, particularly since the president has promised that “no one making under $400,000 will see their federal taxes go up” — a pledge that takes raising taxes on the middle class, which has a higher marginal propensity to spend, off the table as a potential inflation offset.

A Biden-led plan that is overly protectionist is a much greater inflation threat than a plan that isn’t paid for in the traditional deficit-neutral budgetary sense. This framework — based on the principles of Modern Monetary Theory — redefines fiscal responsibility by flipping the age-old question “How will you pay for it?” The real challenge is “How will you resource it?”

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont recently hinted at this approach when he told Politico: “You don’t start off by coming up with a sum and working down. You start out by looking at the needs that need to be addressed and adding them up.” The next step is to figure out how to budget your available real resources to deliver on those priorities.

Modern Monetary Theory is not alone here. For a historical outlook, we can revisit what John Maynard Keynes proposed in “How to Pay for the War: A Radical Plan for the Chancellor of the Exchequer,” a lesser-known work of his. To the contemporary ear, the title suggests that Keynes was trying to figure out how to come up with the money to finance World War II spending. He wasn’t.

Keynes understood that the British government, which controlled its national currency, could create all the money needed. The purpose of the book was to show the government how to scale up and sustain higher levels of spending while containing inflationary pressures along the way. It noted the soldiers, bombers, tanks, combat gear and more that would be needed to prosecute the war and how the entire economy would need to be reoriented, quickly, to supply those things.

We’ve all grown accustomed to thinking about taxes as an important source of revenue for the federal government. That’s in part because it’s easy to think of the federal government as being like state and local governments, which without sufficient revenue — from income taxes, property taxes, sales taxes and more — could not finance their operations. Yet these entities don’t have the federal government’s currency-issuing powers, which greatly changes the spending capacity of government.

In 1945, a man named Beardsley Ruml delivered a fiery speech before the American Bar Association titled “Taxes for Revenue Are Obsolete.” He wasn’t a crank. He was the chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. As Mr. Ruml explained in that speech, taxes first and foremost help to avoid a situation where too much money chases after too few goods: “The dollars the government spends become purchasing power in the hands of the people who have received them,” he said, while “the dollars the government takes by taxes cannot be spent by the people.”

More recently, economists like L. Randall Wray and Yeva Nersisyan have begun to think about how to pay for a Green New Deal using Keynes’s earlier “radical” framework. And even if one were to accept the terms of the old deficit-oriented budgeting currently favored in Washington, going even bigger on infrastructure, if executed carefully, is still doable: Larry Summers, the former Obama White House senior economist, admitted in 2014 that “public infrastructure investments can pay for themselves” and that “by increasing the economy’s capacity, infrastructure investment increases the ability to handle any given level of debt.”

We face enormous intersecting crises: a climate crisis, jobs crisis, health crisis and housing crisis, among others. It is going to require a lot of money to do what is necessary. As Kate Aronoff recently wrote in The New Republic, “To meet the emissions targets outlined in the Paris Agreement, experts estimate the United States government will need to spend at least $1 trillion annually.” And the White House’s infrastructure proposal, while historically ambitious, still falls far short of the scale of the problem.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez pointed out, for instance, that Mr. Biden’s plan has a $40 billion investment in public housing for the entire nation but New York alone may have that level of need.

By focusing on how much revenue they think they can raise from a broad array of tax increases on the well-off, Democrats risk allowing the scope of their ambitions to be governed by the dated framework of fiscal responsibility in Washington and the political appetite for tax increases, rather than what is truly possible based on logistics in the real economy.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department and other agencies that track labor force participation, price increases and supply shortages can be tasked with developing a specific dashboard of blinkers and warnings to alert to problems.

If Congress and the White House want to be responsible stewards of both society and the U.S. dollar’s value, then rather than focusing on taxation of the rich, they should prioritize and supply exactly what it would take, in terms of real resources, to electrify the nation’s power grid, repair every deficient bridge, give caretakers a living wage, upgrade our railways, and deliver clean drinking water and high-speed broadband to every home. How many people will it take to do all of that work? How much steel, concrete and fiber optic cable? How many tower cranes and other kinds of building equipment will be needed? The list goes on.

These are the questions we should ask our leaders, and the ones they should be asking themselves — not “How will we pay for it?”

In case you were wondering, Prof Stephanie Kelton penned that op-ed.

More news, tweets, analysis, videos, etc in the comments. Sure Happy It’s Thursday!

Posted in Bernie Sanders, News, Open Thread | Tagged MMT

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Register

Recent Posts

5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread

May 18, 2022 6:53 am | By Benny | 137 comments

5/16-17 News Roundup & Open Thread

May 16, 2022 2:41 pm | By LieparDestin | 109 comments

5.14-15 Weekend Open Threads

May 14, 2022 4:23 am | By orlbucfan | 43 comments

5/11-12 News Roundup & Open Thread

May 11, 2022 7:11 am | By Benny | 58 comments

5/9-10 Open Thread & News Roundup

May 9, 2022 7:49 am | By LieparDestin | 59 comments

5.6-7-8 Open Threads

May 6, 2022 7:45 am | By orlbucfan | 59 comments

5/4-5 News Roundup & Open Thread

May 4, 2022 7:30 am | By Benny | 108 comments

5.2-3 Open Threads

May 2, 2022 12:47 pm | By orlbucfan | 136 comments

5/1 May Day Open Thread

May 1, 2022 9:29 am | By Benny | 39 comments

The Fighting Soul: On the Road with Bernie Sanders part 2

April 30, 2022 12:01 pm | By Benny | 10 comments

Recent Comments

  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread
  • Benny on 5/18-20 News Roundup & Open Thread

2022 Progressive Candidates

The Squad

  • Jamaal Bowman (NY-16) – Profile – June 28, 2022
  • Cori Bush (MO-01) – Profile – August 2, 2022
  • Mondaire Jones (NY-17) – Profile – June 28, 2022
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) – Profile – June 28, 2022
  • Ilhan Omar (MN-05) – August 9, 2022
  • Ayanna Pressley (MA-07) – September 6, 2022
  • Rashida Tlaib (MI-13) – Profile – August 2, 2022

House

  • Jessica Cisneros (TX-28) – May 24, 2022
  • Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04) – June 28, 2022
  • Pramila Jayapal (WA-07) – August 2, 2022
  • Ro Khanna (CA-17) – June 7, 2022
  • Summer Lee (PA-12) – May 17, 2022
  • Mark Pocan (WI-02) – August 9, 2022

Senate

  • Charles Booker (KY) – GENERAL
  • John Fetterman (PA) – GENERAL
  • Raphael Warnock (GA) – May 24, 2022

 

State & Local Races

  • Chesa Boudin (San Francisco DA) – June 7, 2022
  • Anna Eskamani (FL-HD-47) – August 23, 2022

Search TPW

Archives

©2022 - The Progressive Wing
↑