Even HuffPo is Now Admitting to Bernie Sanders' Fuzzy Math...
Since six straight coin tosses, and not a clear victory in Iowa, gave Hillary Clinton the delegates, the media is now doing its part to secure their Princess Hillary the coronation of Queen. I mean "President." Semantics.
Sanders has said that his plan would pay for itself, partly by making the U.S. health care system more efficient and partly by raising revenue through a series of new taxes. In the end, Sanders has promised, the vast majority of Americans would actually be better off financially, paying less in taxes under his program than they would pay in premiums plus out-of-pocket expenses under the current system.
The Center for a Responsible Federal Budget disputes that finding. In particular, it says, the taxes that Sanders has sketched out wouldn’t produce as much revenue as Sanders thinks -- creating a shortfall of about $3 trillion over 10 years, or much more if it turns out the program also spends more on insurance benefits than Sanders expects.
But if the findings from this new report are even in the right ballpark, then either the benefits Sanders has promised would have to be smaller, the taxes for the plan would have to be higher, or the program as a whole would create huge new deficits.
Translation: Bernie Sanders is a liar. He's hoping to snooker voters into thinking they're getting FREE HEALTHCARE YAY, without having to pay a dime in new taxes. Reality says something different. Don't blame me, blame math.
Listen, this is nothing new. I've covered the flaws in Bernie Sanders' plan for a veeeery long time. Even in my original video debunking the plan, YES, I preemptively addressed what Bernie claimed would be a "net savings" with his mandatory insurance premium. It is a number which is easily debunked, but still cited by his supporters. Watch below.
At the original link for the video, I've provided over thirty five sources and references. What do the Bernie supporters say? That I'm simply paid by "GOP shills" whatever that means. See for them, none of the math matters, so long as the ideals matter. Which, I can partially respect. But allow me to rebut that with a point of my own.
Even if the math did work (it doesn't), even if there were some statistically possible way to deliver on Bernie's promises (he can't)... it would still be morally wrong. To force all private companies out of business, to remove all choice from the consumer and mandate a tax to provide them only one option for healthcare, run by the government, is still wrong. For Bernie to fund it by taxing business owners more and more is still morally reprehensible.
So if we're going to go head-to-head with Bernie supporters on math, we win. Obviously. If we want to go tit-for-tat on ideals, we're still standing on much more solid ground than the man who promises "more free crap."