Are you sure you want to delete this post?
Medicare for all is certainly a possibility, but the devil is in the details.
The current tax rate for Medicare is 1.45% for an individual and 1.45% for an employer, or 2.9% total (and for private contractors). If we were to move to a single-payer system that provides all the services that Medicare does then that percent would need to be drastically increased.
I'm strongly in favor of single-payer healthcare, but I also believe that advocates of it are woefully underestimating the cost of providing quality care for 330 million people. Medicare already consumes 15% of the Federal budget and it only provides coverage for Americans 65 and older. If we were to enact a program for the entire population then we better be prepared to pay drastically more in taxes in order to get it.
Now, that tax increase will correlate nicely with no longer having to pay monthly premiums for your employer based insurance, but not everyone is going to come out ahead in this scenario. Wealthy individuals with top of the line health insurance will certainly fight tooth and nail to keep things just the way they are. As will "low information voters" who think they have great health coverage right now, but would actually benefit from a single-payer system.
It would be a monumental task to pass a well functioning single-payer bill into law and it won't be happening anytime soon considering the current makeup of Congress and the Presidency. However, it is an interesting thought experiment to explore the pro's and con's of instituting Medicare for all.