If you have been paying any attention to any of the 2020 Democratic candidates, you would realize that their basic plan is to provide free healthcare, free college tuition, free $1,000 per month income and now free housing. It’s free to everyone except taxpayers.
Let’s add some of this up:
Free healthcare for all – $3 trillion – $3.5 trillion per year.
Free college tuition for all – about $3 trillion per year.
$1,000 per month free income to low income families – about $1 trillion – $1.5 trillion per year.
Free housing for all – $2.5 trillion per year.
Grand total is $9.5 trillion to $10.5 trillion per YEAR.
The proposed US annual budget is $4.746 trillion and that leaves a deficit of $1.101 trillion.
There are about 140.9 million taxpayers in America. If they cannot afford to pay an additional $1.101 trillion a year just to balance the federal budget, how are they expected to pay an additional $9.5 trillion to $10.5 trillion a year.
As a taxpayer, are you willing to shell out more of your hard-earned money to pay for the free stuff?
Rasmussen Reports asked likely voters this question, kind of and another question:
1* Is there a shortage of safe and affordable housing in America today?
2* A proposal has been made for the federal government to spend $2.5 trillion on a so-called “housing for all” plan that would guarantee all Americans safe and affordable housing. Do you favor or oppose such a plan?
How would you respond?
Here is what likely voters said:
Most voters agree there’s a housing shortage in America but stop short of embracing Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders’ $2.5 trillion plan to guarantee housing for all.
Fifty-six percent (56%) of Likely U.S. Voters think there is a shortage of safe and affordable housing in America today. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that just 28% disagree, but 16% are not sure.
Thirty-nine percent (39%) favor a so-called “housing for all” plan that would guarantee all Americans safe and affordable housing. But just as many (39%) are opposed. Twenty-two percent (22%) are undecided.
Democrats (62%) are far more likely to support a housing for all plan with a $2.5 trillion price tag than Republicans (17%) and voters not affiliated with either major political party (36%) are. But then while 72% of Democrats and 54% of unaffiliateds believe there is a shortage of safe and affordable housing in America, only 39% of GOP voters agree.
Rasmussen asked another question:
3* Would government programs that give additional money to low-income Americans increase or decrease the level of poverty in America? Or would they have no impact?
This is how likely voters responded:
Just 32% of all voters think government programs that give additional money to low-income Americans actually would decrease the level of poverty in America. Thirty percent (30%) say it would actually increase poverty instead, while 24% say it would have no impact. Thirteen percent (13%) are not sure. These attitudes are little changed from last December.
How would I answer this? I’ll defer to the venerable and ever so wise Benjamin Franklin:
“In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries that the more the public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. There is no country in the world where so many provision are established for them (as in England); so many hospitals to receive them when they are sick or lame, founded and maintained by voluntary charities; so many almshouses for the aged of both sexes, together with a solemn general law made by the rich to subject their estates to a heavy tax for the support of the poor. Under all these obligations, are our poor modest, humble, and thankful? And do they use their best endeavors to maintain themselves, and lighten our shoulders of this burden? On the contrary, I affirm that there is no country in the world in which the poor are more idle, dissolute, drunken, and insolent. The day you passed that, you took away from before their eyes the greatest of all inducements to industry, frugality, and sobriety, but giving them a dependence on somewhat else than a careful accumulation during youth and health, for support in age or sickness.”
“In short, you offered a premium for the encouragement of idleness, and you should not now wonder that it has had its effect in the increase in poverty. Repeal that law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. Saint Monday and Saint Tuesday will soon cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labor, thought one on the oldest commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves than could be done by dividing all your estates among them.” The Real Benjamin Franklin: Part II: Timeless Treasures from Benjamin Franklin, Prepared by W. Cleon Skousen and M. Richard Maxfield. National Center for Constitutional Studies, 2008, Pp 453-4.