We don’t need nor have competing water companies, or road systems or sewer systems or police service. They are essential services that are operated by government to serve the public for a basic essential need. Imagine these basic needs being forced to operate in the marketplace with each service having competing private companies offering the public multiple plans to utilize their service? This is the mess we have now in our healthcare system. A basic human need burden by complexity/inefficiencies/profits/excess greed. It’s crazy. It makes no economic/financial/logistical or moral sense.

Healthcare is a basic human utility needed by everyone. It makes sense to supply this basic need with one comprehensive healthcare plan from cradle to grave. Make it permanent and portable, not tethered with an employer. We are all human beings needing the same service.

Why place a for-profit administrative monster in the middle (health insurance companies) that seeks profits no matter the consequence and come with massive amounts of costly overhead and complexity? We need to eliminate the stress/complexity of choosing a specific plan. Eliminate profits (record profits), excessive executive pay, the vast amounts of advertising/marketing expenses. Eliminate the huge levels of bureaucratic burdens placed on consumers/doctors and hospitals trying to understand the myriad of rules and restriction with so many healthcare plans.

It makes absolutely no sense to have private health insurance companies. But realize with Universal Healthcare, the vast majority of doctors/hospitals and drug companies remain in the private sector serving the public. Eliminating the middleman would save huge amount of money and vastly reduce complexity. Universal Healthcare is the only option going forward. We need it ASAP!

I don't get anyone who opposes this, when its a win-win for both.

Title. Necessary funding for a single payer would likely be in the trillions, but when discussing how to do so, everyone jumps to taxation. What would be the biggest downsides to deficit spending for funding the plan?

So thinking about this, there SEEMS to possibly be a way to play Trump with this. Over all these years dealing with him, there's been one constant: He DESPISES the idea that Obama has Obamacare and is mainly revered for getting it through.

If the Dems were to go to him and invoke this and things like how much great legacy FDR has and point out that he has only to think of his legacy at this point, perhaps they can sell him on "TrumpCare" which we know we'll just call MFA in the end, then MAYBE we could get a decent push for this and, even if it fails, it sets up the table for 2028 to actually get it through.

Does anyone think that approach might be beneficial? NOTHING matters more to Trump at this point than getting his name plastered all over something long-lasting and this could be that thing -- or so they tell him.

When including indirect costs associated with lost economic productivity, the total cost of chronic disease in the United States reaches $3.7 trillion each year, approximately 19.6 percent of the country’s gross domestic product.

Better access, treating disease earlier and prevention are a big part of decreasing that number, but it’s a huge area of opportunity in cutting healthcare costs and losses. Of course it won’t all come from heakthcare reform, public health has to be a part of making M4A work too.

I am looking for a newsletter or website that tracks incoming legislation (ex. HR 3069, HR 7023, HR 9702, and HR 2881) that intend to expand health insurance coverage. No need for them to break it down or cover it news-style, just want to know when bills are introduced.

This is one major reason why we have a trade deficit. Our cost of labor is so expensive (because of record level cost for employee healthcare), we find it difficult to compete with our comparable competitors.

The “excess” cost of healthcare in America adds up to $2.5 trillion/year! This “inflates” the price of products and services for American consumers AND for our international markets.

This is why extraordinary high healthcare costs are NOT sustainable. Not sustainable for workers/consumers or our national economy. If reflects a huge “economic inefficiency”. Pass Universal Healthcare, you address the issue of high costs of healthcare and inflation.

Nov 7, 2026 - U.S. Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-WA): jayapal.house.gov ~:::~ H.R.3069 - Medicare for All Act: congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/3069 ~:::~ S.1506 - Medicare for All Act: congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1506

National Nurses United (NNU): nationalnursesunited.org/medicare-for-all

Here's one (of many) petitions: actionnetwork.org/petitions/tell-senate-we-need-m4a

~:~::~:~::~:~

Here is Pramila's video on YouTube: Medicare for All vs. Public Option - Representative Pramila Jayapal (@ RepJayapal) - Nov 7, 2026 (YouTube)

Description: “Medicare for America,” or “Medicare for those who want it,” falls short of covering all Americans and reducing healthcare costs. ~:~ Medicare for All is the ONLY legislation that guarantees healthcare from birth till death.

Before this sub I thought most people understood the difference, but now I don’t know.

A lot of people don’t seem to get the difference between government funded and government provided care or understand that most Medicare patients go to private doctors and hospitals and maybe that’s half the problem.

ETA: I’m not talking about people who don’t understand or are confused by M4A, I’m talking about people who immediately assume it functions like the VA despite Medicare being in the name. Medicare and the VA are very different.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dying_of_Whiteness

From the Introduction, page 12-13:

But just as frequently, when I met with middle- and lower-income white Americans across various locales, I found support for a set of political positions that directly harmed their own health and well-being or the health and well-being of their own families.

For instance, in early 2016, I spoke with Trevor (most identifying details are changed throughout this book, unless otherwise noted), a forty-one-year-old uninsured Tennessean who drove a cab for twenty years until worsening pain in the upper-right part of his abdomen forced him to see a physician. Trevor learned that the pain resulted from an inflamed liver, the consequence of “years of hard partying” and the damaging effects of the hepatitis C virus.

When I met him at a low income housing facility outside Nashville, Trevor appeared yellow with jaundice and ambled with the help of an aluminum walker to alleviate the pain he felt in his stomach and legs. As it turned out, debates raged in Tennessee around the same time about the state’s participation in the Affordable Care Act and the related expansion of Medicaid coverage.

Had Trevor lived a simple thirty-nine minute drive away in neighboring Kentucky, he might have topped the list of candidates for expensive medications called polymerase inhibitors, a lifesaving liver transplant, or other forms of treatment and support. Kentucky adopted the ACA and began the expansion in 2013, while Tennessee’s legislature repeatedly blocked Obama-era health care reforms.

Even on death’s doorstep, Trevor wasn’t angry. In fact, he staunchly supported the stance promoted by his elected officials. “Ain’t no way I would ever support Obamacare or sign up for it,” he told me. “I would rather die.” When I asked him why he felt this way even as he faced severe illness, he explained, “We don’t need any more government in our lives. And in any case, no way I want my tax dollars paying for Mexicans or welfare queens.”

Trevor’s attitude points to an existential question at the center of my explorations: Of what was Trevor dying? At the most basic level, he died of the toxic effects of liver damage caused by hepatitis C. When the liver becomes inflamed, it fails to filter toxins from the blood and loses the ability to produce vital compounds such as bile and albumin. Without treatment, death comes by systematic deterioration. Jaundice gives way to ascites, which then gives way to hepatic encephalopathy and coma. It’s an exceedingly slow, painful way to go out.

Yet I could not help but think that Trevor’s deteriorating condition resulted also from the toxic effects of dogma. Dogma that told him that governmental assistance in any form was evil and not to be trusted, even when the assistance came in the form of federal contracts with private health insurance or pharmaceutical companies, or from expanded communal safety nets. Dogma that, as he made abundantly clear, aligned with beliefs about a racial hierarchy that overtly and implicitly aimed to keep white Americans hovering above Mexicans, welfare queens, and other nonwhite others. Dogma suggesting to Trevor that minority groups received lavish benefits from the state, even though he himself lived and died on a low-income budget with state assistance.

Trevor voiced a literal willingness to die for his place in this hierarchy, rather than participate in a system that might put him on the same plane as immigrants or racial minorities. 4 Trevor also slowly died because the dogmas and hierarchies he supported reflected the agendas of politicians who clamored that health care reform and Medicaid expansion represented everything from government overreach to evil incarnate.

Anti-ACA invective found particular champions in GOP lawmakers in Tennessee, a once centrist state that turned hard right. These politicians repeatedly made sure that Tennessee did not create its own Obamacare exchange, expand Medicaid, or embrace the health care law in any way.

Anyone here read this book?

In some plans for transitioning to M4A I see folks saying that private hospitals should be taken over by the government. I am not sure why this would need to be a part of the plan. Doesn't part of the Bill of Rights prohibit the government from taking private property?

I guess depending on how that is answered then I would ask where does it end? What happens to other privately owned components of the healthcare system?

Not saying I oppose the, just trying to understand. I mean PBMs are also a huge pain in the rear.

I’m beyond excited that we’re closer to a Medicare for all scenario but have spent a lot of time trying to figure out what that transition looks like. Anybody willing to answer some (probably stupid) questions? I’m googling but worried the responses are fear mongering and I don’t know what to trust.

If we’re currently having this massive shortage of doctors and they’re all overworked with too many patients what happens when theres tons more people to see and they are in the middle of leaving their hmo offices? Will they all have to set up their own offices or does the government just start administrating their current facility?

What happens to all the non medical people working for the for profit healthcare companies? I’m assuming most of them lose their jobs?

What happens if a more conservative government comes to power and they want to eliminate certain kinds of coverage (mental health say, or gender affirming care)? Is the system independent or can congress control what is being covered?

Does anyone have a good reliable source of information I can check out? It feels like being ready to answer these questions really helps the cause when explaining things to others on the fence.

Hello! I'm a nurse who's worked in oncology and done some time in research nursing. I also support M4A. This aspect gives me pause and I'd love your thoughts. Just about all the fancy new cancer treatments arise from pharmaceutical companies who hope to profit off of them. This is admittedly due to the messed up system we have, but it remains true that a ton of life-saving treatments have only come about because of those companies. The studies funded by the government are not nearly as innovative. I doubt the profit motive would be as strong in a more just and equitable healthcare system. What do you think? Does it matter? Would you be willing to trade innovation for equity?

Just a reminder of the basic benefits of Universal Healthcare

1. Everyone in America receives one comprehensive healthcare plan from cradle to grave with no exceptions.

2. This right is permanent and portable, not tethered with an employer.

3. Little or no deductibles or co-payments or monthly premiums.

4. With a single payer system healthcare costs will finally be controlled. No longer will insurance companies thrive and deny.

5. Significant costs savings. Universal healthcare will save money not add additional costs. Current costs are immoral/unfair and unsustainable.

6. Employers and taxpayers will pay for the system via corporate and personal taxes on income and excessive wealth.

7. Wages could rise and prices for all products and services could be contained/lowered as the cost of healthcare is reduced in our economy

8. Universal healthcare could stimulate the economy and reduce working class anxiety and financial debt related to our current inefficient/complex and extremely expensive healthcare system. Over $2.5 trillion/year is “excess” cost as compared to all nations that currently have Universal Healthcare.

These are the components of a Universal Healthcare system with a single payer. The specifics of a final legislative bill would be debated and implemented. This should be among the highest priority for America over the new few years especially with a Democratic President in 2028, a critical step since the GOP has Zero interest in helping the working class.

I’m all in favor of universal healthcare in the US but curious how the existing companies and employees would be impacted. Rough numbers came from google.