Home > Uncategorized > Biden proposes progress, Republicans scream “socialism”

Biden proposes progress, Republicans scream “socialism”

from Dean Baker

Almost 70 years ago, President Eisenhower pushed bipartisan legislation that created the interstate highway system. Earlier leaders made universal access to education, starting with kindergarten and running through high school, standard throughout the United States. The Republican Party of today would have one word for these policies: socialism.

Social and economic progress in the United States has always depended on a smart mix of public policies and private incentives. Following World War II, the enormous growth surge that largely created the middle class, depended on the federal highway system that allowed for modern suburbs and the speedy transportation of goods around the country.

The growth surge also depended on a well-educated workforce that was advanced by universal access to high school, and the huge growth in college education that resulted from the GI Bill of Rights and low-cost government student loans.  President Biden’s program is about taking the next big steps. Its plans for spending on physical infrastructure will provide the same sort of foundation for growth that the interstate highway system did more than 60 years ago.

We know that we have to shift to a clean energy economy. Pretending global warming does not exist will not make it go away. Biden’s plan will jump-start the switch to electric powered cars, buses, and trucks. It will also rejuvenate mass transit. And, it will hasten the transition of our power system from fossil fuels to solar and wind energy.

It will also ensure that everyone has access to broadband Internet, just as we moved toward universal telephone service more than 80 years ago. This will prevent the situation we saw in the pandemic where large numbers of people in rural areas and inner cities were largely left out as schools and other activities moved to the web.

The plan also extends the standard for education in both directions. It provides for free community college and free prekindergarten. Schooling that began in kindergarten and ended with high school graduation might have been great in 1930, it is not fine for 2030.

Biden also wants to provide assistance for families that are caring for young children, aged parents, or disabled relatives. Sixty years ago, most women did not work outside the home and instead took full responsibility for their family’s caregiving.

Now, most women do work outside the home. If we want women to do a standard job, and not constantly be pulled away by care giving responsibilities, they need the same sort of support for caregiving that families enjoy in other countries.

It is not an accident and Germany, France, and many other countries have now surpassed us in women’s employment. They provide the support women need to be able to work.

The media continue to describe Biden’s plans as “massive,” “huge,” and other comparable adjectives, as they tell their audience it will cost $4 trillion. While $4 trillion is a lot of money, this is projected spending over a 10-year period in which the U.S. economy is projected to produce more than $280 trillion in goods and services.

That puts it at around 1.4 percent of projected GDP. This is roughly 40 percent of the projected military spending over this period. There is no doubt that Biden’s plan is ambitious, but it’s absurd to treat it as an unimaginable amount of spending.

Finally, we have Biden’s plans to cover the cost of his plan by increasing taxes on corporations and the wealthy. The Republicans are predictable yelling that these tax increases will devastate the economy, slashing investment, growth, and jobs.

There is an old saying, “Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.” At this point, we are up to around fool me twenty times.

Every time a Democratic president pushes a plan that increases taxes on the rich, the Republicans insist it will wreck the economy. Every time a Republican president pushes through a tax cut for the wealthy, we are told that it will lead to an investment boom creating good paying jobs for everyone.

It never works out this way. The economy grew faster after President Obama raised taxes in 2012, and it boomed after Clinton’s 1994 tax increase. There was no investment boom when Reagan, Bush II, and Trump cut taxes.

  1. Ken Zimmerman
    May 13, 2021 at 9:39 am

    If we believe in ourselves and our country and want continuing well being and prosperity for both, we must always invest our talents, our hopes, and our money into that effort. With this all of us advance. For this to provide our society with what it needs we must also never allow concentrations of wealth or power to sabotage our democratic decision making arrangements. What is it about this Republicans find difficult to grasp? Or are they just too stupid or sociopathic to get it?

  2. May 13, 2021 at 12:48 pm

    A belief that more of the same only this time environmentally cleaner is myopic at best. Concentrating expert opinions on how to fix the problems of past expert decisions has numerous interesting limits. If the democratic party has anything at all to add to American culture, it will immediately institute medicare for all, automatic FBI investigation of police murders and a $25/hour minimum wage. A high school level computer program that computes approximately equal population congressional districts of contiguous zip codes and a minimum sum of district boundaries is a logical third step. Fair taxation and legal representation quickly follow. None of this has anything to do with magic pie in the sky expert central plans.

  3. Benjamin
    May 14, 2021 at 6:44 am

    When there is talk about woman going to work as equal as men it suggests that there will be a larger workforce getting into additional competition with men and families (next to migrants) so that there will be a larger overall workforce sharing the same amounts of money which should be at the end of the day one high salary for one person working not two. It is probably a signature of neoliberal societies that it is two people working for one household (out of pure economic hardship) which in my opinion is wrong. There are no societies like this in the history of man except when there were economic hard times because of wars or natural desasters. But we do not have that now otherwise the rich would stop getting wealthier by the second. I miss redestribution of wealth from the top and public ownership under non profit schemes of specific utilities and services

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.