"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!"

So what is McCaskill-Corker? It would mandate that spending, within ten years, go from 24.7% of GDP to 20.6% of GDP. Instead of looking at what society needs, and advancing programs designed to fulfill those needs, and then determining how to pay for them, then, this bill would artificially limit spending to an arbitrary number that is less than the 22% level of spending under Ronald Reagan. And instead of picking and choosing what programs to save under that cap, McCaskill-Corker forces OMB to make the decision of making "evenly distributed, simultaneous cuts throughout the federal budget." This would include mandatory spending like Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security.
...
McCaskill-Corker, then, is the Ryan budget without the fingerprints. Note that they arrived at this spending cap number by looking at historical averages over three decades, none of which included the baby boom generation in retirement. link

Heath care is based on both science and art, and neither are subject to the sharp pencil of market forces. Indeed, the outcomes of health care focus on patients not widgets.  Moreover, health care is not subject to the economies of progress as widgets may be, in the same sense that a Mozart string quartet composed in 1782 still takes in 20ll four string players.

I think the last Republican supporter in Congress, (and of course he later an independent, was Jim Jeffords (his "Medicore" bill was more progressive than Clinton's plan).  But in the 70s, you had Javits, Brooke and other moderate Republicans signing on for a single payer or Medicare-based system.

We have a state and national medical association, insurance companies, and federal and state government through Medicare and Medicaid that approve treatments and recommend prices.

Health care is a demand based business. It is not an option. When you are sick you don't shop around for cheaper treatment, even if it existed. A heart attack demands immediate attention. There are no "Broken bones set Thursday Special!"

So, my conservative friends let us quit lying about the subject.

And given that, through the establishment of Medicare and Medicaid, we have decided health care is a right, the only question is how much we pay and how shall we pay it.

The amount should be enough to properly reward people who are smart enough to become doctors and nurses and dedicated enough to undergo the years of study and associated costs.

And that amount is more now than it was in 1950 when heart attacks were almost always fatal or the precursor of one in the near future. Improved positive expectations in any situation leads to a willingness to pay more.

So the issues are how much and how do we make the payment.

Now my Left Wing friends will say, "Tax the rich," and I admit that is a nice thought. The problem, of course, is that there aren't enough rich, so what they mean is, "Tax everyone but the poor."  The problem with that is that no can define what poor means. Should it be the same as FIT? You know, a family of four making around $40K or less pays nothing?

The problem there is this. How do we insure those who engage in illegal activities, such as dope dealers, prostitution services and oil speculators pay their fair share? I mean if we say that a shot up dope dealer's life deserves the same treatment as a postman supporting a family for four, shouldn't the dope dealer pay? I mean fair is fair, isn't it?

I say that we use a National Sales Tax collected at the RETAIL point of sale (this is not a VAT). To put some fairness into the collection we could exempt unprepared food, utility bills under $200, used cars over 4 years old and other items that impact the working poor more than the rich.

What shall we use as a system to deliver the care and administrate it? Well, we already have that in place. It's called Medicare.

Let me explain.  Here is what BTD says about Klein:

"Ezra Klein is the virtual spokesman for the those who believe that what ails the health insurance market can be fixed by "the market."

Here is what Klein says about the role of government in the healthcare market:

"There's no free-market solution for the health-care system, at least not insofar as "free-market solution" means the government stays out of it. In a free market, people who are sick, or have previously been sick, can't get health-care insurance. Many, many more can't afford it. And a solution that leads to 40 percent of the country being uninsured is no solution at all.

The two eventual choices here are A) government monopoly, like Medicare-for-All, or B) government-structured market, like the Wyden-Bennett Healthy Americans Act, or the system we see in Switzerland."

Link