Dr. Christine Eady MannVerified account

I am in favor of eliminating profit from the healthcare industry in a broad sense. But I am not in favor of banning or eliminating supplemental health insurance policies, just like what many seniors who are on Medicare right now have. Other countries with various types of ....

Universal coverage still have supplemental policies available. As far as the 401k/IRA part of your question, a) insurance companies would still exist in every other sector and would continue (although smaller) in a M4A model b) significant numbers of average Americans...

Don’t have significant sums in those plans c) to me it’s a bit like asking what will happen to oil and gas stocks if we transition to renewable energy: the pros outweigh the cons.

Health care is 1/6 of the economy that you want to make almost completely non-profit. How do you mitigate the disruption to our economy? You touch briefly on health insurers, which make 10's of billions of dollars a year in profit by saying that loss will be rather minor,

which I find unbelievable all things considered, but say nothing about PROVIDERS, such as hospital and provider groups, nursing home chains, medical equipment and device manufacturers & providers, etc, etc.

The loss of capital in the stock market by making all these entities non-profit will be massive. You are rather privileged to be able to discount the importance of 401k's & IRA's as insignificant when many of us in the middle class are completely reliant on them for retirement...

And unless the energy sector goes non-profit, your comparison is not valid. Also, if you believe secondary insurance will be needed, what happens to those people who cannot afford it?

I'm not saying this is all impossible, but until someone who talks about going to single payer takes the economic ramifications of making such a large sector of our economy non-profit seriously, I have a hard time taking them seriously.