>Did he say in 2007 that these reforms are a Trojan horse for a single payer system?
>
>I believe he expressed an opinion- just as he expressed an opinion about the Iraq invasion and lots of other topics. Just as Bush expressed his opposition to abortion, for example. Whether a President is able to or even tries to implement such preferences is a different issue.
>
>As an aside: while it is true that many insured people rely on their employer's scheme, why do comments about moving away from employer-funded schemes necessarily equate to moving to single payer? How did it come about that employers are responsible for employees' healthcare needs in the first place, and why is such a socialist concept seen as a virtue to be defended? Who does it benefit and why?

I'm not sure I understand your question. Are you asking for an American history lesson or just being rhetorical? :o) Your question is also laden with judgmental and pigeonholing statements (socialist concept)... :o) Given your knowledge that the U.S. does not only have employer-funded health insurance but it evolved that people generally choose that option and it became competitve for businesses, I will take this message as sarcasm and not really a question at all... :o)