Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: FAIR: according to @WSJ: $18 trillion. Actual cost of Sanders' programs: -$2 trillion [View all]slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)38. kick - FAIR: according to @WSJ: $18 trillion. Actual cost of Sanders' programs: -$2 trillion
to find later
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
65 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
FAIR: according to @WSJ: $18 trillion. Actual cost of Sanders' programs: -$2 trillion [View all]
Catherina
Sep 2015
OP
Ok, so let's assume these numbers are ok. 15 trillion - 10 trillion = 5 trillion
Persondem
Sep 2015
#8
Agree with OP. Problem is, even Vermont gave up trying to explain that to their citizens.
Hoyt
Sep 2015
#9
WSJ?? Funny how the Clinton supporter all of a sudden like Rup Murdock. What next? Fox News? nm
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#10
If all you've got for a rebuttal is a lame try at guilt by association then you've already lost
Persondem
Sep 2015
#13
I doubt he'll make it to the GE, but the effect there would be deadly. The ads write themselves.
Persondem
Sep 2015
#23
Sanders has a groundswell of support from voters who will never be effected by his tax proposals.
frylock
Sep 2015
#24
As I said, funny how the Clinton supporters are all of a sudden friends of the WSJ.
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#27
Again it's funny how that Clinton supporters become friendly with the WSJ if they like the
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#35
At least I have that. What do you have? Side with the Oligarchs and hope they will treat you well?
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#37
Ok, so I have provided a link to the source of the WSJ article with all kinds
Persondem
Sep 2015
#53
The Wall Street Journal is a Right Wing Rag. Funny how Clinton supporters now
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#54
kick - FAIR: according to @WSJ: $18 trillion. Actual cost of Sanders' programs: -$2 trillion
slipslidingaway
Sep 2015
#38
I think it shows a certain hypocracy for those that are opposed to Sanders to all of a sudden
rhett o rick
Sep 2015
#40
The cost to the government is (around) $18T though. There's the rub. They tried this in Vermont,
DanTex
Sep 2015
#41
But displaces the costs of private insurance and saves overall money by doing it.
Cheese Sandwich
Sep 2015
#55
95 percent of Americans would pay less than they do now for health insurance and medical care.
Cheese Sandwich
Sep 2015
#57
Bullshit. The following progressive financing plan would meet the specifications of HR 676:
Cheese Sandwich
Sep 2015
#61