>Why not? Is it somehow detrimental?
>
>No. I just hadn't realized that I was expected to comment on your personal situation without knowing what it is.
>
>Medicare tax is flat, i.e. the same 2.9% (divided on two halfs) for any income bracket.
>
>Yes, but 2.9% of $150K is more than 2.9% of $75K. Similarly, if care is funded from tax it may depend on your tax bracket and various exemptions you may enjoy. It really would depend how it is implemented. How can I be expected to say whether this will be more or less than what you pay now without all the details?
>
>Since you have raised it, presumably you have a viewpoint about your personal expectations. What is it?
>
>I disagree with your way of counting it. Your assumption that everyone will pay less implies that some savings are going to appear in the system.
>
>No, I'm working from the vigorously tested assertion that the cost per person is less in a universal system. Obviously I cannot be expected to comment on the effects on one person versus another. While you seem reluctant to say it clearly I get the feeling you expect to pay more. Can you please tell us why?
>
I am not reluctant at all. That's the easiest answer. Every taxpayer (i.e. person really paying income taxes on net basis, sorry for extra clarification but it is needed in this world), me including, will pay more. Someone will pay for trillions increase in government spending caused by government healthcare. Did you read US budget projections for the next 10 years?