This is an absolutely tiny fraction because most poor people can't afford the healthcare necessary to actually thrive in the economy. Ditto the education. What we need is equality of opportunity, and that requires social services.
> I'm against the income redistribution part of Medicare for All, for aforementioned reasons.
I'm completely uninterested in this. Unless tied to income it's a regressive tax that punishes the poor disproportionately along the axis of marginal utility of money.
> Once again, polls are incredibly misleading and dependent on the wording used in the survey. You need only look at surveys of Obamacare vs. the ACA to see this effect.
This is a different subject and so not relevant. Everyone knows what Medicare is. The only thing most right-wingers know about Obamacare is that Obama created Obamacare. Really it's more like Romneycare for All as it's essentially a Republican policy. There's not a single left-leaning thing about making every individual pay a private company for healthcare. You're not showing a skew in reality, just marketing.
I suspect Americans would feel differently if they knew that Obamacare single handedly dropped the rate of people dying from lack of cover by almost 50% per annum.
> You continually try to engage in asking the same questions by claiming to not understand all the statistics I've given you and I don't believe you're conversing in good faith anymore. Goodbye.
Respectfully disagree. I've successfully refuted every concrete point you've made up to and including whether "the left can pass such a bill" and whether you really need cataract surgery tomorrow.
I wish you the best. Medicare for all is coming. It's just a matter of time.
However, you have failed to answer my core question. Do you think that Medicare should be abolished? Should Medicaid? If so, why? And in what concrete ways do you think that would make America a better place? More efficient? And why is 65 the magic age at which "socialism" finally starts to make sense?