Current Events > why are politicians touting 'public option but you can keep your insurance'?

(+) Yeah! (+)

that seems completely impossible and much more expensive to run than "medicare for all" should be, seems like a refusal to confront people's fear of the unknown/political weak-will

if the federal plan is one you are not automatically signed up for but have to buy in to that is funded by a mix of taxes and people's premiums, then some people would be paying higher taxes for nothing...and weakening the bargaining power of the new option in the process. the current employer plan is reliant on a massive subsidy in the form of all employer health insurance purchases being tax deductions, presumably this would be removed to pay for some of the costs (otherwise people on the govt plan would be paying more to support people on employer plans...as is currently the case).

the whole concept of single payer is moving away from subsidies and towards price controls via bargaining power so keeping the subsidy seems unlikely--that's the government taking in less tax revenue in order to fund operations that reduce the ability of the single payer system to negotiate for lower prices. but if the subsidy is gone, and the government plan is partially or fully taxpayer funded, why would anyone want their employer insurance? it'd be much more expensive than the alternative.

supplemental insurance is already a thing in medicare (and in european single payer systems) and i'd assume most private insurers would survive on that front (and not be subsidized, at all).
---