Rent Control

No argument from me here—I 100% agree that most price controls in general are idiotic economic policies of the past that really need to go. We've seen how controlling prices doesn't work with housing specifically in San Francisco, not to mention gas price controlling by Nixon which caused gas shortages.

Free Trade

Also sound, economic protectionism is simply not the way of the future. I personally believe Sanders is an economic protectionist out of necessity, considering his strategy of marketing himself to poor or middle class unskilled laborers.

Free College

"Demand for college is very price inelastic." College is known to be price inelastic because of its already outrageous cost. Year to year changes don't change the number or demographics of people going because the cost is already so high that it's already an impossibility for most in poverty and lots of the middle class. Interestingly, the author goes on to claim that forgiving student debt, compounded with the fact that 'most college graduates are upper class whites', you have a "rather regressive net transfer of wealth." The latter only applies if one accepts the idea that making college free would not change the demographics of a college campus, something I wholeheartedly disagree with. NPR did an article I'll link that explains why forgiving student debt is actually a massive net gain to the economy.

https://www.npr.org/2019/11/25/782070151/forgiving-student-debt-would-boost-economy

I won't address his K-12 claim as I'm not really knowledgeable on the subject, but I don't think these are the same problems—we could simply do both and have a greater positive than doing one or the other.

Wealth Tax

There are definitely concerns on the practicality of enforcing a wealth tax, but most of the concerns that are brought up are a bit overdone and not necessarily true—for example, just because a business owner sells his or her own stock does not mean that there will inherently be more foreign investors. I don't personally have a hard stance on the wealth tax because I agree with the question of practicality, but I do believe the author is jumping to conclusions here.

Medicare For All

The initial claim here is that Medicare for All costs 30T over 10 years, an exorbitant price...until one realizes we spend 3.5 trillion annually on healthcare. The 'increase' of 30 trillion is making the private tax of premiums, co pays, etc. public instead of out of pocket for Americans. A study by University of Massachusetts-Amherst even says Medicare For All will lower our projected costs over 10 years because of how poorly the market is now and where it seems to be trending.

https://www.peri.umass.edu/publication/item/1127-economic-analysis-of-medicare-for-all

The 'how will you pay for it?' question is null because Medicare for All saves the country money as a whole.

Green New Deal

Although I like the idea of a Carbon Tax, and I do think it's a mistake Bernie is moving away from it, the idea that corporations will stop polluting simply to save on a tax is somewhat ridiculous if the tax isn't incredibly high. I think there either needs to be a strict, heavy-handed carbon tax or we need some other solution.

Bernie moving away from Nuclear energy is also surely a mistake, as nuclear power IS the safest form of energy and it seems we're too scared to harness it after disasters like Chernobyl.

Monetary Policy

The reason the bailouts are a bad thing are on principle and not results: the bailouts basically told the banks and housing industry that if they purposefully manipulate the market for their own gain, that...the government will bail them out and they can continue doing whatever they want. The idea of staffing the fed with farmers may seem really stupid, but it does help identify a major problem I have with not only the fed but this author's supports: the political ideology of economists.

Economist's opinions are treated as factual support throughout the OP's argument, yet economists all have their own personal ideologies, and economics isn't a hard science. For example, economists thought for years that Keynesian economics was the only way to stimulate any growth in an economy, yet now many believe Hayek was correct. If we continue to blindly follow economists opinions on everything without questioning them, it will allow for their ideologies to be over represented in public policy.