Math is Hard

Bernie Sanders is proposing a national health care system commonly referred to as Medicare for All. The low-side estimates of the program’s cost are around 3 trillion dollars a year.

Michael Bloomberg’s net worth is estimated to be about 62 billion dollars. If Bernie were to confiscate all of that wealth (and it could be liquidated as cash), he could pay for a week of his proposed program. If he could similarly liquidate the fortunes of the ten richest Americans, he wouldn’t find enough money to run Medicare for three months. And he would have destroyed productive assets that would generate further cash flow to fund the system. Even if he kept the seized assets as an investment portfolio (equivalent to a 100 percent income tax rate), a reasonable long-term rate of return would only provide for a week-and-half of Medicare for all each week.

The other 95 percent of the money required would exceed the government’s current income from taxes, so bringing Medicare for All online while maintaining something near the current level of other government services would require at least doubling the current total amount of federal taxation. If the billionaires have had their assets seized so that they have nothing left to be taxed, who do you think is left to be taxed? Cleaning out the millionaires won’t produce the same windfall as billionaires. If it’s still possible to pay wages at the current level after much of the productive investment in the economy is destroyed, then the average citizen’s share of the federal tax burden would likely rise to above 33 percent of personal income.

And then we’d have to figure out how to pay for the Green Nude Eel.

6 thoughts on “Math is Hard

    • Dude, I don’t think you know your audience. Pretty much everyone here is aware that the only fiscally conservative Congress is one with a Democratic President and a Republican House led by Newt Gingrich.

      If you aren’t getting paid by the post you’re pretty much wasting your time here. Otherwise you’re just pretty much wasting our time.

      • No offense, but I’m not here because I’m getting paid. I’m here because I enjoyed watching Mr. Hoge point out the idocity surrounding team Kimberlin.

        You don’t have to be a Trump supporter to have enjoyed reading about that.

        • And commenters here at Hogewash! don’t have to agree with me as long as they stay within the bounds found in The Fine Print (see the Menu bar).

          • Always good for a reminder of just how many frivolous lawsuits you’ve been on the recieving end of.

            I am curious as to your opinion on the concept of “loser pays.” For the sake of this argument, ignore any potential issues of implementation or such, just assume that loser pays was adopted at some distant point in the past history of America.

Leave a Reply