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 Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

FogerRox

(13,211 posts)
16. Hillary's increase
Wed Nov 30, 2016, 02:39 AM
Nov 2016

in infrastructure was something like 208 billion a year, Bernies was 250 billion.
Both proposals were too modest.

250 billion is 1.5% of GDP on top of existing spending of 1.2%, totals 2.7% when we should be spending 6% of GDP, about 850 billion additional dollars, this would create about 21 million jobs and add 89 billion a year in additional FICA revenue ensuring Social Security is good thru 2090.

The reason Bernie wanted to tax the wealthy to pay for infrastructure is that Obama has signed a "Pay as you GO" bill. In fact if you look at Both Hillary and Bernie websites, both candidates paid for everything in a responsible way.

None of Trumps tax breaks are funded so the Pay as you GO makes his tax breaks a no go, unless the GOP repeals "Pay as you Go".

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»winning enough rural vote...»Reply #16