Bernie Sanders, the new Santa Claus

The senator from Vermont has little chance of defeating Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.

At a time of rising inequality and short-circuited social mobility, Sanders is unapologetic about taking some wealth and income away from those who have a lot of both to ease the path upward for those who don’t.

Why?

Because the decline in employer-guaranteed pensions is leaving many of today’s retirees (and will likely leave most of tomorrow’s) without the retirement security that was once far more common.

[...] his program has come under criticism from those who say its costs are too high, that the government already spends too much on senior citizens, and that providing universal benefits such as free college would assist not just the less affluent but also those who may not need much help.

[...] consider what a victory it would be for those who are weary of responding defensively to the phrase “tax and spend” if the sack of proposals Sanders carries over his shoulder began to reframe the popular debate.

In the 1970s, champions of supply-side economics and its steep tax cuts — thinkers and publicists such as Irving Kristol, Jude Wanniski and Arthur Laffer — argued that Republicans had become dour advocates of “root canal” economics who offered nothing to bring voters good cheer.

Tax cuts could be for the GOP what programs were for Democrats, and Republicans have never stopped proposing new tax cuts.

The Democrats, the party of income redistribution, are best suited for the role of Spending Santa Claus.

What’s valuable for progressives in the Two Santa Claus Theory is that it reminds voters that the point of tax increases is not to drag down the rich but to finance initiatives on behalf of citizens who can use some help in lifting themselves up.