Bernie Sanders as President

Opening Arguments:For many democrats(especially young), Bernie Sanders may appeal to voters who want a political and ideological revoltuion. However, the last thing the United States of America needs is an idealist president, rather, we need a president who will actually get things done, successfully.1. Bernie Sander's economic plan is unrealisitc and overly optimistic. His plans require a 47% growth on government. How will this be paid for? In taxes, mainly on the wealthy(at about 67% for income tax[1]), amounting to over 14 trillion dollars.[2]. He also argues that cutting down on HealthCare spending would reduce costs. However, this had been disputed by many reputable economists.[3] For example,." A costing of Mr Sanders’s plans by Kenneth Thorpe of Emory University, using more conservative assumptions, found that the plan was underfunded by nearly $1.1 trillion (or 6% of GDP) per year. If Mr Thorpe is right, higher taxes will be required to make the sums add up. In 2014 Mr Sanders’ own state, Vermont, abandoned a plan for a single-payer system on the basis that the required tax rises would be too great."[4]"But 20% of health spending flows to doctors, nurses and the like. A study published in Health Affairs, a journal, in June 2015 found that the average nurse earns about 40% more, and the average doctor about 50% more, than comparably educated and experienced people in other fields. To bring costs down to British or Canadian levels, these salaries would have to fall. Half a million Americans work in the private health-insurance industry, which would shrink or disappear if Mr Sanders had his way. His plan is “radical in a way that no legislation has ever been”, argues Henry Aaron of Brookings, a think-tank."[4]In addition, his economic plan does not take into account the immediate effects of removing or changing government stimulus and the massive migration of jobs and corporations his taxes would create: "According to the Tax Foundation’s Taxes and Growth Model, the plan would significantly increase marginal tax rates and the cost of capital, which would lead to 9.5 percent lower GDP over the long term. On a static basis, the plan would lead to 10.56 percent lower after-tax income for all taxpayers and 17.91 percent lower after-tax income for the top 1 percent. When accounting for reduced GDP, after-tax incomes of all taxpayers would fall by at least 12.84 percent."[5] 2. Bernie Sanders would not be able to enact any of his policies, he has relatively little support. Even though recent wins in some states seem to indicate Sander's popularity, those states do not reflect the overall nation's atttitude.[6]. Only 26% of republicans have said that they would ever support a socialist. Overall, 53% said they would never support a socialist. Now that may only be half, but consider this, the majority of Congress is considered establishment, who have demonstrated a lack of support for Sanders, and Republicans, who would find it a political disater to support Sanders. Bernie would not be able to ennact any of these laws without approval of Congress.[1,2]http://www.economist.com...[3] http://www.ibtimes.com...[4]http://www.economist.com...[5]http://taxfoundation.org...[6]http://www.thedailybeast.com...