When I wrote about “crazy Bernie Sanders” in 2016, I wasn’t just engaging in literary hyperbole. The Vermont Senator is basically an unreconstructed leftist with a disturbing affinity for crackpot ideas and totalitarian regimes.
His campaign agenda that year was an orgy of new taxes and higher spending.
Though it’s worth noting that he’s at least crafty enough to steer clear of pure socialism. He wants massive increases in taxes, spending, and regulation, but even he doesn’t openly advocate government ownership of factories.
Then again, there probably wouldn’t be any factories to nationalize if Sanders was ever successful in saddling the nation with a Greek-sized public sector.
He’s already advocated a “Medicare-for-All” scheme with a 10-year price tag of $15 trillion, for instance. And now he has a new multi-trillion dollar proposal for guaranteed jobs.
In a column for the Washington Post, Robert Samuelson dissects Bernie’s latest vote-buying scheme. Here’s a description of what Senator Sanders apparently wants.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants the federal government to guarantee a job for every American willing and able to work. The proposal sounds compassionate and enlightened,
but in practice, it would almost certainly be a disaster. …Just precisely how Sanders’s scheme would work is unclear, because he hasn’t yet submitted detailed legislation. However, …a job-guarantee plan devised by economists at Bard College’s Levy Economics Institute…suggests how a job guarantee might function. …anyone needing a job could get one at a uniform wage of $15 an hour, plus health insurance (probably Medicare) and other benefits (importantly: child care). When fully deployed, the program would create 15 million public-service jobs, estimate the economists. …the federal government would pay the costs, the program would be administered by states, localities and nonprofit organizations.
As you might expect, the fiscal costs would be staggering (and, like most government programs, would wind up being even more expensive than advertised).
This would be huge: about five times the number of existing federal jobs (2.8 million) and triple the number of state government jobs (5 million). …The proposal would add to already swollen federal budget deficits. The Bard economists put the annual cost at about $400 billion. …overall spending is likely underestimated.
But the budgetary costs would just be the beginning.
Bernie’s scheme would basically destroy a big chunk of the job market since people in low-wage and entry-level jobs would seek to take advantage of the new government giveaway.
…uncovered workers might stage a political rebellion or switch from today’s low-paying private-sector jobs to the better-paid public-service jobs… The same logic applies to child-care subsidies.
And there are many other unanswered questions about how the plan would work.
Does the federal government have the managerial competence to oversee the creation of so many jobs? …Can the new workers be disciplined? …Finally, would state and local governments substitute federally funded jobs for existing jobs that are supported by local taxes?
If the plan ever got adopted, the only silver lining to the dark cloud is that it would provide additional evidence that government programs don’t work.
The irony is that, by assigning government tasks likely to fail, the advocates of activist government bring government into disrepute.
But that silver lining won’t matter much since a bigger chunk of the population will be hooked on the heroin of government dependency.
In other words, just as it’s now difficult to repeal Obamacare even though we know it doesn’t work, it also would be difficult to repeal make-work government jobs.
So we may have plenty of opportunity to mock Bernie Sanders, but he may wind up with the last laugh.
P.S. Regarding getting people into productive work, I figure the least destructive approach would be “job training” programs.
Beyond that, I’m not sure whether make-work government jobs are more harmful or basic income is more harmful.
[…] Yet if Sanders wants to minimize his own tax bill, why should he complain when the rest of us try to protect ourselves from being victimized by his redistribution agenda? […]
[…] mucho material para mi columna diaria. Anteriormente he escrito sobre iniciativas estatistas de Bernie Sanders y sobre ideas extrañas presentadas por Elizabeth […]
[…] lots of material for my daily column. I’ve previously written about statist initiatives from Bernie Sanders and bizarre ideas put forth by Elizabeth […]
[…] it’s just because both only math-challenged people are drawn to Bernienomics and this […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
dahillauthor:
A Universal Basic Income combined with a flat tax would eliminate about a million federal workers (700,000 welfare and 300,000 IRS). If set at the poverty level, it would eliminate disincentives for those currently on welfare, who want to provide a life better than poverty level for themselves and their families. For those currently on welfare who have no ambition to improve, there would be no change. Disincentives would be reduced for those on unemployment or disability.
This shift of workers and the reduction in time consumed on tax filing should boost the economy by 1 3/4% annually.
The disappearance of tax deductions, replaced by the UBI, would improve decision making regarding healthcare and retirement planning.
A workfare program would draw many potential workers in the wrong direction, low productivity jobs with seniority as the way to advancement, rather than free market competition and an emphasis on personal skills development.
New businesses would not be able to compete in the job market against the salaries and benefits offered.
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Rédigé par Daniel Mitchell Internationale de la Liberté de blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty blog, […]
[…] Authored by Daniel Mitchell via International Liberty weblog, […]
Saunders was kicked out of a hippy commune for being too lazy to work. The same happened to him at a socialist commune in Israel. This loser has never worked at an honest job. He represents the basest instincts of men.
Fabianism https://wiki.mises.org/wiki/Fabianism
“I’m not sure whether make-work government jobs are more harmful or basic income is more harmful.”
Definitely the latter. First, the nature of basic income is transparent – it’s obviously a handout – whereas these new government jobs would be wrapped up in the sort of “nation-building” rhetoric designed to hide the fact that they don’t meet any sort of real cost-benefit benchmark. Second, the overheads with basic income are much, much lower. Have a computer send a check every month. Whereas make-work government jobs need managers and offices and capital equipment and so on, even if you literally pay people to do nothing more dig holes and fill them back in.
Bernie’s plan just ‘progressively’ advances his socialist agenda [which is shared by most of the elected fed dems]. “Workers of the world” stuff where you don’t decide your job–the State does. I disagree with Lindsay Graham on a regular basis but when he made the quip in the debate about Bernie honeymooning in the USSR and never coming back, I gave him all the high marks that deserved…and a good laugh.
What all you bards won/haven’t said about the “Left” is to lable them for what they are: Communists whether following K.Marx or Michel Foucault. Quite all the fake news already. Call a spade a spade.