> I'm arguing about the feasibility of it in light of naive statements.
I have directly addressed your question with the fact that already a third of Americans are in a single payer system, and most of the world has a single payer or hybrid system.[1] It's naive to think we don't know how to do it, and that we can't learn something from other nations when we expand it.
If you don't think we're capable of achieving the same results as a bloc of nations that has twice our population and many more cultural differences between them, why? Low confidence in America as a whole? Math and science fundamentally change in different time zones? Nobody in America knows how to read German, Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Italian, Swedish, Norwegian, Dutch, Belgian, or English?
> If the answer was "Just expand Medicare", it probably would have been implemented already but the fact that it's not should tell you something: maybe it's not that easy.
There's an even simpler explanation: S.1129 was not passed.[2]
> So my question is not whether or not you think it's a good idea, my question is how do you get from the current state to your goal of a single payer system?
No, your question is, "How can I keep the conversation going pretending that I'll accept an answer?" So let's nip that, and you can answer the following question: what evidence would convince you it is feasible?
Yes, the bill was not passed. Neither were any of the proposals for the last 3 decades. Why do you think that is??
I mean, it’s “obviously” just so easy. Do you have better answers than President Obama? Or President Clinton before him? Or Bob Dole? Or John McCain? Yet with all their knowledge and connections, they couldn’t get it accomplished. Note that in nearly 20 years, Medicare for All bills only made it out of committee once. Why do you think that is?
Perhaps because it’s an enormously complex problem with lots of stakeholders and lots of competing interests. One that doesn’t get fixed by just copying a different model that operates outside of the U.S. constraints.
You still never addressed why those bills don’t pass. It’s like your answer is the trivial (and useless) one that “it’s because not enough people voted for it.”
Saying “we already cover 100MM” doesn’t explain how it can be more than tripled. I didn’t claim it can’t be done, I’m asking why none of the proposals have worked out so far. I’ve never claimed the US “doesn’t know how”, I’m saying they haven’t shown political will to implement it. I’m asking for a pragmatic answer that shows why it hasn’t worked despite previous efforts.
I’m asking for your opinion why that’s the case that nothings has been passed in the last 30 years despite the desire among many, many people to do so. I’ve already outlined a few examples that you just blow past for the naively simple answer. That’s not helpful nor does it demonstrate anything beyond a simplistic understanding of the problem.
I have no problem accepting an answer that actually shows an understanding of the complexity of the problem, even if I don’t agree. I’ll help you: I think the very first problem needs to campaign finance reform. Because without that, any proposed bill that goes against the monied interest is dead in the water. But that’s just the first of many things that has to happen before the bills you’re talking about have any chance.
Again, I’m not arguing whether it’s technically feasible. I’m saying the US has not yet shown its politically feasible. I think you’re conflating my position on these.
That latter part is a much tougher and complex problem but every bit a necessary part of the solution. So take just a very small subset of that problem: how do you plan on mitigating the insurance industry’s influence in preventing the passage of a bill that goes against their interests?
Once you figure that out, you’ll have dozens of other political concerns to solve before you ever get to consider implementing the technical solution.
I have directly addressed your question with the fact that already a third of Americans are in a single payer system, and most of the world has a single payer or hybrid system.[1] It's naive to think we don't know how to do it, and that we can't learn something from other nations when we expand it.
If you don't think we're capable of achieving the same results as a bloc of nations that has twice our population and many more cultural differences between them, why? Low confidence in America as a whole? Math and science fundamentally change in different time zones? Nobody in America knows how to read German, Spanish, French, Japanese, Korean, Italian, Swedish, Norwegian, Dutch, Belgian, or English?
> If the answer was "Just expand Medicare", it probably would have been implemented already but the fact that it's not should tell you something: maybe it's not that easy.
There's an even simpler explanation: S.1129 was not passed.[2]
> So my question is not whether or not you think it's a good idea, my question is how do you get from the current state to your goal of a single payer system?
No, your question is, "How can I keep the conversation going pretending that I'll accept an answer?" So let's nip that, and you can answer the following question: what evidence would convince you it is feasible?
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_with_univers...
[2] https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/112...