Hyperbole much?
Would you like single payer, if say the “single payer” was Blue Cross,, State Farm,, Allstate?
No, I wouldn't really trust an entity all that much that was more concerned about their bottom line than providing health care services.
Bottom Line?
You are sadly mistaken. Gov’t interest, so far, has BEEN the ‘bottom line’. “We’ll make it cost less.” And they’ll do that by FORCE of denial of care. Just LOOK at all those savings!
Of course, the taxes, once imposes will never disappear or reduce, but HEY the Gov’t will be paying less.
I recently had a very bad fall accident. I had no issues getting the needed care, nor did that nasty horrible money grubbing insurance company not pay the costs it was contracted to cover.
You really believe, looking at what Gov’t is trying to do to its electorate, you believe that the Gov’t is more trustworthy than a company?
And how did you conclude that the government cares about providing healthcare, rather than accumulating power? For bonus points, explain why an entity that gives us the miracle of indian health service, and post office, the VA medical system, and which funds BOTH sides of the tobacco wars,,, should be placed in charge? If someone is motivated by a profit motive, they want to please the patient.
government sees the patient as a cost, and is upset by a patients demands. The government has no motive to provide service that please the patient.
I have a challenge for you to step back and really think about this preconceived notion for a moment.
What is the 'bottom line' for insurance companies? It is to have customers who continue to pay premiums, right? They can't do that if the customer is dead or so ill they can't work, correct? Insurance companies have a vested interest in you being in a position to continue to pay your premiums.
If you really dig, you will find that health insurance companies invest a LOT in wellness services- services and support to keep you healthy to where you won't need to use the more expensive treatments or that will pull you away from work and being able to continue to pay premiums. My insurance company, Blue Cross, for example, invests a lot in these wellness services and encourages continual check-ups and treatments to prevent illness in the first place. Add into that the factor of competition, even as little as it is, is still out there. They are constantly trying to one-up the other companies in the services they offer.
Now let's look at the government providing 'cheap' healthcare as you describe. Do they have any incentive at all to do any of the things I just described? No. They are only focused on their own job security (and unelected bureaucrats don't answer to you or I). Job security for them amounts to amassing power as so you are dependent on them. This isn't even theory, look at the services the government provides- Medicare, Tricare*, VA, etc. None of those services try to promote customer satisfaction or wellness. Only treatment after the fact for what they claim is the cheapest cost. All of these are notorious for cutting services or providing sub-standard care. The bureaucracy and inability of these services to pay doctors have gotten to the point that they won't even accept Medicare any longer. Case in point
Even President Obama himself made it perfectly clear that his plan is not about quality of care but about doing as little as possible to save money. Remember, Just take a Pill?
So be honest, when it comes to your health, do you really want to trust it to a single payer government system who cares only about what they can sell to the press or do you think a competitive, free market solution is the better answer?
*One exception with Tricare is 'Cadillac' plans elected officials and people high up in departments get that are not available to the avergage government worker.