Most Americans preach this socialism idea without ever even leaving the country or experiencing first hand, sorry but most the people that I know that have, they would disagree with all of you also. Even a simple history book would show the downfall of socialism in almost every country.
I disagree with you. I lived in France and experienced the best care I have ever received there. Coming back to the US healthcare was really depressing to me.
There are tradeoffs however. Good luck saving enough money to become wealthy and retire early with their confiscatory tax rates. I'd rather have more money in my pocket and be able to choose how to spend it - on medical care, on charity, on plastic flamingoes, or on mutual fund shares, whatever.
^^^^THIS!
Did you read JLee's post? I'll quote it in case you missed it:
See the link I just posted. France spends less per capita (less than half) on health care than the US does. They have superior health care for less money overall, so in theory if this could be replicated the US would actually save money.
Anyway, you (Killerbrandt, not JLee) don't get it: even if France's tax rates are confiscatory, that's irrelevant because they're apparently spending that money on something other than health care! Just because a country has high tax and nationalized health care does not mean it has high tax because it has nationalized health care. It's sloppy reasoning that leads to an erroneous conclusion.
In reality, France's model suggests that we could cut costs by half and simultaneously improve quality by eliminating the insurance industry middlemen. And nothing about that forces us to institute evil socialism in any other aspect of society, or raise taxes for other stuff.
GREAT!! Then tell us that plan! :) I will gladly support a new health policy that cuts the costs in half and doesn't raise our taxes. So far Sanders plan does not show that or any other plan proposed out there. Since I don't get it, please show me this plan.
https://berniesanders.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/friedman-memo-1.pdf"The net savings from single payer come from reduced spending on administrative activities, in both
private insurers and providers’ offices, reduced spending on monopoly prices for pharmaceuticals and
medical devices, and a slowdown in the growth of spending because of controls on administrative costs
and drug prices. While these savings come to over $10 trillion in 10 years, they are offset by increased
spending because of the extension of coverage to the uninsured and increases in utilization with the
removal of copayments and deductibles."
You hear taxes and you scream, cause taxes are baaaad. You are failing to see the big picture.
"It is possible to calculate the savings to families from the Sanders single payer program. For a
middle-class family of four with an income from wages of $50,000 and an employer-provided
family plan of an average price, the Sanders program would save $5,807, or 12% of income."
"Employers would save money, giving them an incentive to hire more workers. Instead of paying
premiums for employer-provided health insurance that often come to well over 10% of payroll,
employers would pay only 6.2% towards financing the program. In the case of a worker who
earns $50,000 and has an average family health plan with $12,591 employer contribution, the
employer would save over $9,400 per worker."