Larry Levitt astutely, as he usually does, encapsulates the core trade-offs of any and all versions of Medicare for All proposals:
Every health policy has trade-offs, and with Medicare for all, they’re big ones.
On the one hand: Universal coverage, reduced prices, no premiums, and lower out-of-pocket costs.
On the other hand: Higher taxes, more government control, and less revenue for providers.
— Larry Levitt (@larry_levitt) November 15, 2018
These are real trade-offs with some people being much better off, some people being about the same and some people people and groups being significantly worse off. The weighing of those trade-offs are value driven weights. Technocrats, like me, can inform you that the trade-off for X is 77 millibebes of pain to Group Z and 103 pleasure points to Group M but the decision that this is a good deal or a bad deal is not a technocratic question. It is a decision informed by evidence but weighed by values.
Just keep that in mind, please.