It comes down to this debate because the pro market people offer zero solutions other than staying the course and the course is straight down. Offer something better.
I don't understand why that matters. But if it does, couldn't the US implement social healthcare at the state level? Canada and California have roughly equal populations, for instance.
IMO, the federal government has been getting too large just like how they dangle interstate highway funds from states for enforcing the stupid 21 year old drinking age.
No state alone can, because it would have (or at least would fear) a large influx of people coming for the free healthcare. If enough states set up their own systems and make them interoperable, it might have some legs. I hear rumblings of this from time to time,
What I meant was a federally-mandated, state-implemented system. Federal law can define a minimum level of healthcare that every state is obligated to provide. States set up and administer their own systems, any way they want - single-payer, mandatory private insurance etc. Isn't that how Canada actually does it?
It handles the "US is too big" objection to universal healthcare that everyone loves to bring up, by moving the systems to a lower level.