> It would mean millions of jobs lost, what are those people going to go do? This is legitimately one of the biggest issues with single payer, and absolutely w

> It would mean millions of jobs lost, what are those people going to go do? This is legitimately one of the biggest issues with single payer, and absolutely worth talking about. Our grossly inefficient system has created many layers of administrative bureaucracy that would have to be shed and that's not going to be an easy problem to solve. > Defund the craziest, largest military in the world and you wouldn't pay for 10% of the single payer health system. The CBO scored 5 different variants of a single payer system and found that 4 of them would reduce overall healthcare expenditures[0], so even if taxes were increased to pay for single payer, those increases would theoretically be less than the current amount we spend on healthcare because of the lower administrative overhead. Lots of policy people have done research on this, it's simply not true that a single payer system is just out of the realm of possibility. > If your endgoal is single-payer healthcare in the USA. Step 1 is getting Americans healthy again and I think we have hit a roadblock. I fail to see the correlation here, Americans don't want single payer because there are powerful political voices that frankly tell some serious fibs about it (see your own comment above about the viability of single-payer). The food supply is a serious issue as well, but this is like arguing that everyone in the US just needs to start making six figures and that's how we'll end poverty. That's just not reality. 0: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20210210.190243/full/ https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20210210.19024...