8 comments in reply to "Bag it up! A progressive agenda, to go."

  1. Robert Salzberg says:

    Pretty good for off the cuff. Here’s one of my tweets from 2 years ago:

    “Eliminate cap on income subject to payroll taxes. Single payer health insurance. Entitlement Reform in an itty bitty Tweet….”

    To the bag list I would also add the slogan: Tax Wall Street to Rebuild Every Street. (FTT dedicated to infrastructure.)


  2. Robert Salzberg says:

    Senator Bernie Sanders released a similar 12 point economic program last week:

    http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-details-economic-agenda-for-america


    • Smith says:

      Thanks for link on Sanders, I used in my comment below as a starting point. There are a few progressive Democrats I would hope consider challenging Clinton, mostly Senators or former Senators, Sanders VT, Warren Ma, Brown Oh, Webb Va, and one who is not running but holds the number two Democratic leadership position in Senate just behind Reid. There is also Governor Jerry Brown Ca, who is much more palatable than Andrew Cuomo, though both are princes who inherited the title of governor to some extent, just as Queen Hillary challenges Prince Jeb, all very Game of Thrones, nothing like modern England where the monarchy is ceremonial, and there is a proposal to abolish the House of Lords.


  3. Chuck Sheketoff says:

    Good list…though given the momentum these days, I always start with “First, do no harm” http://www.ocpp.org/2014/07/31/blog201408-income-inequality-oath-first-do-no-harm/


  4. Smith says:

    The progressive agenda must start with some type of government program or action.
    While most of Bernie Sanders’ agenda is admirable, he and others including this blog, start off on the wrong foot I think, by not citing most of the moves as a restoration of the New Deal and a return to Eisenhower prosperity and equality (broad income measures, definitely not returning to Jim Crow civil rights or McCarthy era witchhunts).
    1. Tax policy should return to Eisenhower marginal rates, 90% on income above $2 million, not the current 40%. This is essentially what Piketty argues for too. (80% on a $1 million). There is no substitute for reducing inequality and taking away the threat of a super rich aristocracy from controlling America except by restoring the rates we previously enacted.
    2. Infrastructure spending financed by either the higher taxes on the rich or deficit spending should be used to end the recession. There is no substitute for a return to basic Keynesian economics.
    3. Free universal education. This would encompass closing gaps in preschool, after school child care, the summer recess, and college education. It would recognize increased spending is not the answer, but paying teachers less than bankers is non nonsensical, and college is the new high school. It restores what free high school and the GI Bill provided.
    4. There are a host of other measures, especially repealing Taft Hartley and secondary boycott ban, stopping unfair trade agreements, ending most exempt status of workers under the Fair Labor Standards Act, but number one should be equal pay and free labor, give women equal pay, (partly by expanding child rearing accommodations) and give immigrant labor equal pay (by making them free, with full labor rights, ending employee sponsorship requirements).
    1. Tax the rich
    2. Infrastructure spending, with Keynesian deficits during a recession.
    3. Free education
    4. Equal pay and free immigrant labor.

    There’s excellent policy proposals in Elizabeth Warren’s book “Fighting Chance” about reversing recent changes that create instability in financial markets and enlarge onerous debt on the middle and lower class. I’d make that point 5 if I was allowed one more.

    I do support a higher minimum wage but expanded EITC and subsidized jobs are counter productive and create winners and losers. Both forms of subsidized wages penalize fair wage employers and do little or nothing to create more jobs. New government jobs and/or spending don’t have that drawback.

    Again, this all about a restoration to what previously worked.


  5. Smith says:

    there is an extra erroneous non as in
    non nonsensical
    unfortunately.
    The point was paying teachers less than bankers effects the outcome of our educational system.


Leave a Reply to Robert Salzberg Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.