Sanders endorses small tax hike on all to fund family leave

[hill2016]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/18/politics/bernie-sanders-payroll-tax-hike-family-leave/

Bernie Sanders says it's not just Wall Street and corporate America that would pay more if he's elected president: All workers would face a slight payroll tax hike.

The Vermont senator who's seeking the Democratic presidential nomination said Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that the across the board increase would come as part of his push to guarantee paid family leave.

Sanders touted a measure sponsored in the Senate by Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand of New York that would impose a new 0.2% payroll tax to finance family leave payments. The proposal would allow workers to get up to 66% of their salaries as paid family leave for up to 12 weeks.

Thoughts? Do you agree?

I do. I believe that all the new government spending Bernie wants should be financed by everyone not just the top 1% or top 10%. That's what a real socialist society is about (everybody pays and everybody benefits).

I'm also very happy that finally he is getting serious about rolling out his policy positions on the "who pays" part and admitting that he can't raise all the money from the rich. Also, remember this is just one part of his platform. Soon I'm sure he will discuss how he wants to pay for free public college, universal health care for all (couldn't work in Vermont), etc.

[JackInGreen]

1. If it provides what's stated

Hell yes I'm ok with it.

[TM99]

2. Sanders is a Social Democrat.

Not everyone will carry the burden for us all, nor should they. Yes, we all pay taxes, and yes, we do need to return to at least Reagan era tax rates on the top 10% and top 1%. We also need to repatriate taxes owed by large corporations like Apple that hold billions overseas. And a slight payroll tax hike is not out of the ordinary.

[azmom]

3. I am more than okay with it. Let me tell you why:

When I had my child and had to return to work after the allotted time, I was not able to function.

Both my husband and I were working, and we found it very difficult to find affordable child care. We finally found a lady down the street who would babysit for us. I was still breastfeeding at the time, and my hormones were still all over the place. I found it so difficult to hand over my newborn baby every morning to someone I barely knew. I cried every morning.

After two weeks of being back at work, I had to quit. I don't know how we got by, but we survived.

After 20 years, I still have not forgotten what that experience was like, and I would certainly not mind a tax hike if it would help other parents not have to go through that. I would not mind it one bit.

[think]

4. Sometimes people forget that the military and other sectors of our government benefit the .1%

much more than an average person.

People that are very wealthy in this country owe that ability to be wealthy on the fact that they benefit greatly from things our government does & has done. This should be reflected in the taxes they pay.

The idea is not to tax the very wealthy out of existence but rather to make sure these individuals pay their fair share for the economic liberty they enjoy as a by product of what our government provides them.

As to the family leave it is understandable that not all government programs will be paid by the 1% and .1%.

[frylock]

5. Sounds good to me.

[JaneyVee]

6. 0.2% sounds reasonable.