The real issue generally speaking is people with union negotiated healthcare tend to really like their health insurance because in at least certain cases, they're getting Cadillac plans that give them a one up on seeing the best doctors around, in addition to in certain cases paying less in premiums than they would be taxed for M4A.

The second piece is that M4A is a huge unknown, and so they'd want to keep their health insurance because they're afraid that what the government will offer will ultimately be worse.

The first point is certainly easy to address as that money would then likely be renegotiated to result in salary increases, but with regards to the second, what would stop a republican administration from doing things like, effectively banning abortion by refusing to pay doctors who perform them through executive order.

I like my health insurance in the sense that I am fairly confident that I will like my current health insurance better than the insurance I will have in five years. The same way that I liked the insurance I had five years ago better than the insurance I have today.

Basically I think no one expects it to get better, so they are just all hoping it doesn't continue to get worse (while expecting that it will).

It's not even a cliche -- it's a talking point from the insurance industry.

That statement was a stumbling block in one of the recent Democratic debates. I have no idea why none of the candidates drive the point that insurance != doctor home(in most cases) .

I loved my health insurance before Obamacare. I had a nice catastrophic coverage plan that was perfect for me. Now those are illegal.

Nobody does. The real translation is old people don’t want to change doctors.

I felt this is something that politicians say to two groups: the insurance companies and the "anti-socialism" libertarian crowd (who have injected themselves into the republican party).