31–40 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$1 trillion less profit.
That would be a massive hit to our GDP.
Cars, clothes, TVs, Labubu dolls. People will use the savings to buy things. In massive quantities.
What about quality of care tradeoffs? In Canada, for example, you are forced to use the government system, and if it doesn't deem you important enough, there is no private option.
>A single-payer universal health care system could cover every American, save more than 100,000 lives a year, and still cost $1 trillion less than the system it would replace, according to a new preprint study led by researchers at the Yale School of Public Health.
$1 trillion less profit.
What about quality of care tradeoffs? In Canada, for example, you are forced to use the government system, and if it doesn't deem you important enough, there is no private option.
Is this quality improvements including or ignoring the 30-ish percent rejection rate of the most popular healthcare system, including such gems as insulin and pre-authorizations refusing surgery for necrotic tissue when “maybe they could PT it, have you tried?”
What about quality of care tradeoffs? In Canada, for example, you are forced to use the government system, and if it doesn't deem you important enough, there is no private option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would be a massive hit to our GDP.
Think of all the insurance jobs that would be hit, too. Unfortunately we've bloated the healthcare industry to have a lot of employees
This is why it doesn't happen: politicians get bought. "Jeffries co-sponsored Medicare for All legislation between 2013 and 2021, but in August 2026, he stated he shifted his stance and stated that he no longer supports or co-sponsors the proposal." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakeem_Jeffries#Healthcare
Many Democratic politicians are moving away from progressive positions, including Ocasio-Cortez. They seem to be following the old (and failed) Democratic Party tactic of moving to the center to get elected.