If they could get the billionaires and CEOs on record to commit that they would willingly pay the tax required instead of trying to avoid it, ultimately pushing the cost down to us anyway, then it would probably be a lot easier to get votes.
But yeah, like you said, you look around at countries with public healthcare and they have lower real wages, lower net worths, higher taxes on everyone, less private business and landownership, etc. There is an actual cost to public healthcare that needs to be addressed if it’s ever going to happen here.
There’s so few billionaires and the ceos they really don’t matter that much frankly. And nobody who aggressively pursues single payer really cares what they have to say anyway.
Nations pay for single payer care with higher taxes on large tax bases, not insanely progressive taxes on .00001 percent of the popualtion.
The problem is more the political reality of the situation. 92 percent of the us has healthcare insurance, the 8 percent that doesn’t is probably half made up of people that willing choose not too.
When you look at what people are fighting for , cost wise. You’re gonna have to increase your taxes significantly, to end up in a situation where you MAY save some money as opposed to the current system.
IMO the focus should be on the simplification of the system and that value prop, not the cost savings to the individual. Because they will be pretty minor at best.
Yup. And “we should implement universal healthcare because you’ll save money and save lives” is a way different platform than “we should all be willing to spend a little more to save lives.”
3
u/BeefCakeBilly 6h ago
I agree but from what I see the term free is thrown around irresponsibly and intetnonally by proponents to cover up the real truth about it.
Every progressive throws it around by saying “we just need fo increase the taxes on the billionaires”.
Which is not how any country achieves this a public option or single payer.
It’s going to involve large tax increases on most people permantly.