No. of Recommendations: 2
Why isn't it a good analogy? There are trillions of dollars of physical and human capital that have been invested in expectation that the current system will remain (mostly) in place going forward. That's why you can't just go and cut reimbursement for medical services by 30%, or whatever.
It's not a good analogy because the same medical providers - doctors, nurses, hospitals - would continue to provide the same services, only they'd be paid by a single payer rather than thousands of for profit insurance providers. I wouldn't suggest an across the board instant 30% cut. Some formula can be found that doesn't bankrupt everyone.
It's almost impossible to do things that are going to be massively unpopular within a decent-sized portion of the electorate.
I think universal health care will be massively popular with most of the electorate.
