I suspected that Dr. Chaufan was trying to pull a fast one on us by citing that figure out of context, but I could not verify it. So all the readers of the forum should be grateful to you for doing this.

Likewise, I suspected that they were trying to pull a fast one on us, whoever claims the Congressional Budget Office did not evaluate Single Payer Plan. For of all those people on the web, whose claims I read, not ONE stated the Office’s motive for not doing it. They ALL offered their own speculative reasons as if they were fact.

Again, thanks for correcting this omission.

That said, I have to say that the LAO’s estimate is not convincing. For as you yourself point out, they tax increase they estimate matches what is spent today. But this seems to ignore how much costs will change if a single payer plan is adopted.

This is because in effect, a single payer plan is really a government enacted price-ceiling. It enacts the ceiling by using the size of the government order for services to dictate a low price, a price lower than the market price. It is a monopoly not of the producer, but of the consumer. But it is a monopoly, and therefore it interferes with the system’s ability to reach a fair market price.

Dr. Chaufan might not be willing to admit it, but it is a fact economic history that EVERY time the government enacts a price-ceiling, we get the opposite of the stated intent: instead of lowering the price, we get shortages and high prices on the black market.

This is not just conservative propaganda, nor is it an argument for unbridled laissez-faire, it is fact.