I’ve had several reporters ask me to comment on the philosophical and policy differences between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders.
I’m always happy to oblige, yet I don’t think any of them have included my comments in their stories because I always give what seems to be a very unsatisfactory response. My standard line is that Sanders and Clinton are two peas in a statist pod.
Yes, I realize that Sanders has a more aggressive us-vs-them approach, while Hillary is calculated and cautious, but those are merely differences in rhetoric and style.
What matters is action. And if you look at the Senate voting records of Sanders and Clinton, there’s almost no difference between them (or, for that matter, between them and Obama).
Let’s look at some of their policy proposals. Here are some excerpts from a Townhall column on Sanders’ statist agenda.
According to Bernienomics, raising the minimum wage to $15 an hour would prevent greedy capitalists from exploiting their workers and paying below a “living wage.” …Sanders…is…fighting for European style “free college”…Sanders supports the Environmental Protection Agency’s CO2 emission standards, even though these will raise the costs of energy and manufacturing. Sanders also supported allowing the Federal Communications Commission to regulate the internet as public utility… Sanders wants to raise taxes on the rich as much as possible…he has stated his desire to tax the rich at more than a 50 percent income tax rate. Sanders also recently proposed a massive increase in the estate tax… Sanders believes that Social Security is the “most successful government programs in American history,” so it only makes sense that he wants to expand it. …Sanders is also a major proponent of a single-payer health care system.
In other words, a typical statist agenda.
What about Hillary? Well, she’s must more guarded in what she says, but you can get a sense for her ideological mindset by looking at her new scheme to boost the capital gains tax.
Here’s some of what Ryan Ellis wrote for Americans for Tax Reform.
Hillary Clinton today proposed the most complex and Byzantine capital gains tax rate regime in history. …Under the Clinton plan, there would be six – yes, six — capital gains tax rates for those whose total taxable income puts them in the top 39.6 percent bracket. …or taxpayers not in the 39.6 percent bracket, we already have a graduated capital gains structure on assets held longer than a year. For taxpayers in this range, the rates could be 0, 15, 18.8, 20, or 23.8 percent. …her plan actually creates 10 different tax rates on capital gains, not counting those gains taxed as ordinary income due to their shorter duration of ownership. By anyone’s definition that’s really stupid tax policy. It will only serve to distort capital markets as investors will buy and sell not based on rational market signals, but on exogenous, arbitrary tax holding period considerations.
Not to mention that higher tax rates on investment will discourage risk-taking and entrepreneurship. And let’s not forget that it’s not a smart idea, from the perspective of competitiveness, to have the world’s highest capital gains tax rate. Or to pursue policies that will depress capital formation and thus lead to lower wages.
Now let’s get back to the main question. Is there a difference between Sanders and Clinton?
One could argue that Sanders has a more robust left-wing agenda. But that doesn’t make Clinton a moderate. Indeed, I challenge anyone to identify a single position she holds that would result in smaller government or less intervention.
The bottom line, as illustrated by this cartoon prepared by Jonathan Babington-Heina, is that Sanders and Clinton only differ in how fast they want to travel in the wrong direction.
P.S. This is the second cartoon from Jonathan I’ve shared. He also put together a superb cartoon that depicts the senseless damage caused by double taxation.
P.P.S. You also can get a sense of Hillary’s leftist mindest by looking at some of the crazy things she’s said over the years.
And to be balanced, Bernie also says crazy things. Let’s close with this example of political humor I saw on Twitter.
And here’s some more Hillary humor if you still haven’t received your recommended daily allowance.
[…] Who’s actually greedy? […]
[…] that doesn’t necessarily mean they think the same or have the same agenda. As the cartoon illustrates, Bernie wants to travel at a faster rate in the wrong […]
[…] Who’s actually greedy? […]
[…] other examples of Bernie humor, you can click here, here, here, here, here, here, here, […]
[…] International Liberty Advertisements […]
[…] other examples of Bernie humor, you can click here, here, here, here, here, here, and […]
[…] bien disfruto del humor enfocado en Bernie (vea aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí, aquí y aquí), debo señalar que la imagen anterior, aunque divertida, no es […]
[…] I enjoy Bernie-focused humor (see here, here, here, here, here, and here), I have to point out that the above image, while amusing, isn’t […]
[…] maybe the crisis will occur sooner than we think. I wrote back in 2015 that the debate between Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders was merely a discussion over how fast we […]
[…] In a strange way, I admire Bernie Sanders. He openly embraces big government. Back during the 2016 campaign, I frequently observed that the difference between the Vermont Senator and Hillary Clinton is that he wanted America to become Greece at a much faster rate. […]
[…] In a strange way, I admire Bernie Sanders. He openly embraces big government. Back during the 2016 campaign, I frequently observed that the difference between the Vermont Senator and Hillary Clinton is that he wanted America to become Greece at a much faster rate. […]
[…] remarked many times that he wants America to become Greece at 90 miles per hour while she seems content for the country to become Greece at 55 miles per […]
[…] voting record as a Senator was almost identical to Bernie […]
[…] I’ve been accused of making supposedly inconsistent arguments against Hillary Clinton. Make up your mind, these critics say. Is she corrupt or is she a doctrinaire leftist? […]
[…] crazy Bernie Sanders, she doesn’t want to become Greece at 90 miles-per-hour. She’s content to travel in the wrong direction at a steady 55 […]
[…] other words, become Greece at 55 miles per hour rather than Bernie’s desire to become Greece at 90 miles per […]
[…] If we take what he says seriously, Trump is more statist than every Republican who sought the GOP nomination but less statist than both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. […]
[…] forget, by the way, that the only difference between Bernie and Hillary is how fast we travel on the road to […]
[…] on what I think they actually believe, not what they say. So even though Hillary and Bernie are singing from the same nutty song sheet, I suspect she’s exaggerating her leftism and he’s downplaying […]
[…] on what I think they actually believe, not what they say. So even though Hillary and Bernie are singing from the same nutty song sheet, I suspect she’s exaggerating her leftism and he’s downplaying […]
[…] Clinton and Bernie Sanders are basically two peas in a pod on economic policy. The only difference is that Sanders wants America to become Greece at a faster […]
[…] Clinton and Bernie Sanders are basically two peas in a pod on economic policy. The only difference is that Sanders wants America to become Greece at a faster […]
[…] Clinton and Bernie Sanders are basically two peas in a pod on economic policy. The only difference is that Sanders wants America to become Greece at a faster […]
[…] Clinton and Bernie Sanders are basically two peas in a pod on economic policy. The only difference is that Sanders […]
[…] Clinton and Bernie Sanders are basically two peas in a pod on economic policy. The only difference is that Sanders wants America to become Greece at a faster […]
[…] If we take what he says seriously, Trump is more statist than every Republican who sought the GOP nomination but less statist than both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. […]
[…] If we take what he says seriously, Trump is more statist than every Republican who sought the GOP nomination but less statist than both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. […]
[…] And we’ll start with the crazy Senator from Vermont. I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more Sanders-specific humor. I’m probably missing some examples, but a quick look through my archives reveals only the cartoon at the bottom of this post and the satirical poster included in this post. […]
[…] And we’ll start with the crazy Senator from Vermont. I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more Sanders-specific humor. I’m probably missing some examples, but a quick look through my archives reveals only the cartoon at the bottom of this post and the satirical poster included in this post. […]
[…] var td_screen_width = document.body.clientWidth; if ( td_screen_width >= 1140 ) { /* large monitors */ document.write(''); (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); } if ( td_screen_width >= 1019 && td_screen_width < 1140 ) { /* landscape tablets */ document.write(''); (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); } if ( td_screen_width >= 768 && td_screen_width < 1019 ) { /* portrait tablets */ document.write(''); (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); } if ( td_screen_width < 768 ) { /* Phones */ document.write(''); (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); } And we’ll start with the crazy Senator from Vermont. I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more Sanders-specific humor. I’m probably missing some examples, but a quick look through my archives reveals only the cartoon at the bottom of this post and the satirical poster included in this post. […]
[…] And we’ll start with the crazy Senator from Vermont. I’m surprised that I haven’t seen more Sanders-specific humor. I’m probably missing some examples, but a quick look through my archives reveals only the cartoon at the bottom of this post and the satirical poster included in this post. […]
[…] especially galling to hear Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton compete to see who can make the most inane comments about the financial […]
[…] especially galling to hear Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton compete to see who can make the most inane comments about the financial […]
[…] especially galling to hear Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton compete to see who can make the most inane comments about the financial […]
[…] especially galling to hear Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton compete to see who can make the most inane comments about the financial […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] In retrospect, staying in bed would have been a better choice. This debate was basically the same as the others, with both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders competing on who could turn America into Greece at the fastest rate. […]
[…] Hillary and Bernie are two peas in a pod, I have no strong thoughts about that […]
[…] I suspect that most people would cite differences in personal ethics, but I’m a policy wonk so I actually think the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination are two peas in a pod. […]
[…] bureaucrats presumably would more likely be interested in the choice on the other side between the two peas in the statist pod, […]
[…] bureaucrats presumably would more likely be interested in the choice on the other side between the two peas in the statist pod, […]
[…] I suspect that most people would cite differences in personal ethics, but I’m a policy wonk so I actually think the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination are two peas in a pod. […]
[…] I suspect that most people would cite differences in personal ethics, but I’m a policy wonk so I actually think the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination are two peas in a pod. […]
[…] I suspect that most people would cite differences in personal ethics, but I’m a policy wonk so I actually think the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination are two peas in a pod. […]
[…] I suspect that most people would cite differences in personal ethics, but I’m a policy wonk so I actually think the leading candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination are two peas in a pod. […]
[…] Wow, the communists in China want free markets. Maybe there’s hope for some of America’s more statist politicians! […]
[…] I reserve the right to be really depressed later this […]
Chael: “Education and health are arguably human rights.” It’s certainly true that there are people who argue that, but they’re wrong. At least, they are not human rights in anything like the same sense that freedom of speech and religion are human rights.
I can have freedom of speech without imposing on you in any way, and vice versa. When I say I want freedom of speech, I am not demanding that you do anything for me. If you don’t like what I have to say, you don’t even have to listen. I am just asking that you leave me alone.
But when you say that education and health care are human rights, you mean that someone else should be forced to pay to provide them to you. If I don’t think you really need the education you demand, I can’t just walk away. If I try to refuse to pay the taxes to support it, men with guns will come to my house and force me to pay.
Furthermore, once you say that education and health care must be provided by the government, then the government controls it. I don’t suppose you would seriously insist that everyone get all the education and health care they ask for, for free. I mean, if a totally healthy person went to the hospital and said he wanted a heart transplant, and when asked if he is having heart trouble he says no, but he just wants one to be safe, or he says that he needs a new heart because his girlfriend dumped him and broke his heart, should the hospital just say okay and perform the surgery at taxpayer expense? I hope you’d say of course not, that’s ridiculous. So somebody has to decide what health care demands are “reasonable” and what are not. There are lots of cases less absurd than my example where reasonable people would say no. And there are lots of cases where knowledgeable, reasonable people could disagree. So government bureaucrats would have to decide who gets what health care.
Do you think that the rich and powerful control the government? Of course they do. So under government-run health care, the rich and powerful will manipulate the system to get the care they want, while the poor and powerless will get the crumbs that are left over. Suppose that a billionaire whose brother is a senator believes he needs an operation, but under the regulations he is not qualified to get it. Do you think that he could manage to get the regulations changed by sprinkling a little money and influence around? Suppose that a homeless person needs an operation, but under the regulations he is not qualified to get it. Do you think he has the same chance of getting the regulations changed? If the billionaire and the homeless person both need a kidney transplant, and there is only one kidney available, are you going to stand there and tell me that you really, honestly believe that the decision which to give it to will be made purely on the basis of medical factors, and that the homeless man has just as much chance of getting it as the billionaire?
Just by the way, I can give personal experience of how Obamacare has helped me. My company doesn’t provide insurance so I have to buy a policy myself. Before Obamacare, I was paying $400 per month for a policy with a $5000 deductible. I thought that was a very high deductible, but okay, I could live with it. Obamacare made that policy illegal. It didn’t cover things that the government says a policy must cover, such as pregnancy (I’m a single man), drug rehabilitation (I’ve never used illegal drugs and have no plans to start), and AIDS (I’m heterosexual and have no plans to change). I am now paying $810 per month for a similar policy with a $13,100 deductible. That is the absolute best that I could find. Thank you, socialized medicine.
Nominay: “the money is not for Sanders personally” If you mean that under Sanders, 100% of taxes would not go to buying Sanders a big house and fancy car and whatever, no, I don’t suppose they will. I can’t speak for Sanders specifically, but liberal politicians in general seem to have no problem blasting the greed of others while taking big bucks to fund lavish lifestyles for themselves. Hillary Clinton and Al Gore are certainly not living in one-room apartments and eating mac & cheese every night.
But regardless, that’s not the important point. Sanders wants to decide how the money that you work for and you earn is spent. He wants Bernie Sanders to decide, and not you, what kind of car you get to drive, what kind of medical care you get, what charities should be supported, etc. He wants to use your tax dollars to pay bureaucrats and policeman to take your money and decide how it will be spent, and to tell you how you are allowed to spend the money that he graciously decides to allow you to keep.
[…] I reserve the right to be really depressed later this […]
[…] It’s a simple matter of math. The income tax simply isn’t capable of generating enough revenue to fulfill the fantasies of folks like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. […]
[…] It’s a simple matter of math. The income tax simply isn’t capable of generating enough revenue to fulfill the fantasies of folks like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders. […]
[…] not all of them. Some politicians, either because of malice or ignorance, think we should do nothing, even though that will mean a […]
[…] on the left want even more of the same. But why should we expect that to have any positive effect? Indeed, it’s more likely that an […]
[…] you want some political humor that is clearly anti-Sanders, you can click here for two funny […]
[…] you want some political humor that is clearly anti-Sanders, you can click here for two funny […]
Wow it’s like you don’t have any idea how anything works. Sorry to be harsh, but restoring taxes back to the correct, fair rates popular during America’s most prosperous era is not statism. Extending the umbrella of human rights provided by the government is not socialism. Socialism is government ownership of property and means of production in a society. Bernie has nothing in his long – and very consistent, mind you – history in office that suggests anything so radical. This is parroted propaganda. Bernie is a Capitalist who believes in extended human rights. We already have firemen and policemen who don’t need to be paid by those they help. Why not medical professionals and college professors? Education and health are arguably human rights. And he wants to implement a reconstruction phase much like we did almost 100 years ago to improve everyone’s quality of life. Nothing in his strategy is controversial. Nothing is radical. The only radical change he would push for would be to restore our democracy. He wants big money out of politics and he wants to improve voter turnout. Both would strengthen our democracy. It would spur competition from independents that would gain equal footing with democrats and republicans. Maybe we could finally get out of the two-party trap we’ve entrenched ourselves in. I mean seriously listen to what he has to say before spouting arrogant, egocentric misinformation about the man.
Oh my…
Bernie is better than Hillary.
Well gonorrhea may be better than genital herpes but it doesn’t mean that I really want either of them in my life, or anyone else’s for that matter.
[…] process of deciding which lawmaker is 75 percent good and which one is 65 percent good (or, in too many cases, comparing one who is 10 percent good with one who is 5 percent […]
[…] I’m sure many other politicians would occupy that same […]
[…] aussi une leçon que certains politiques américains ont besoin […]
[…] what it’s worth, I’m not exactly shocked to see Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders at the […]
[…] also a lesson that some American politicians need to […]
Sanders is much more sensible on gun control than Clinton.
Is that second cartoon really honest? With all the tax loopholes that 90% goes down to 36%, and the money is not for Sanders personally. It’s for everyone and everything that can benefit from it.
You and Hillary are probably more alike than she is like Sanders. She’s pro corporate, just like you I bet, pro Wall Street and pro bankers, like you I bet, pro Nafta and Cafta like you I imagine … and she’s a war hawk neo conservative, like some fools … but not Bernie Sanders.