They estimate a twenty five percent savings. Actually that should be possible even with all the state residents covered properly. Fifty percent is possible once the initial catch up period is done. Actually in Canada each province runs it's own health care system. So there are some differences between provinces.

Per capita with all Canadians covered is half the current American expendatures. Even though a lot of people are not covered in the states. Under single payer the doctors can work for much less and still take home the same bucks as their overhead is vastly reduced. Hospital services are billed at cost of course with no profit allowed.

What is not discussed is the deductables,copays etc total eliminations. That may be an additional direct savings to the citizen. A lot of people will be watching Vermont.

I also wonder if it might attract some business to the state. Vermont touches Canada and the physical location has been a thorn for some time I imagine as well.

A citizen of that state must be all to aware of what the actual situation is just to the north. People in close proximity talk. It would be interesting to see the results if having a single payer system option was placed on a state ballot.

I have come to believe that the change over cannot really come through the federal government. I think the insurance companies have that controlled. The best the federal government may do is just to enable it at the state level.

A state by state attack on the health care corporations may be the only way really possible to beat them off.

I hope Vermont is also diligent enough to tackle the drug industry as well. They may have to do this to make it work.That may be a hard one down the road but should be doable. Some state has to be the first to take them on.

There are just too many current problems around the health care issue in America for things not to start happening. It is also too much of a major distraction.

What is not talked about is if the current system where kept more or less intact. It would become an unbearable load on the economy at some point. We Canadians are all too aware of the costs even at half the current Americans per capita cost. How much Vermont actually gains from this move may be dependant on how quickly other states go this way.

My own long held original opinion as a Canadian of the ideal sustainable system. You pay a reasonable rate for office calls out of pocket. Say up to three hundred a year Everything else is covered 100 percent. In Canada this was felt to hurt the poor so it was not adopted. Fifty years later I still think it may have been better.

I think you're right. Focusing on individual states is similar to guerrilla warfare. At the federal level, the insurance companies can amass their forces and carry out a frontal attack. It may be harder to resist when the battle is fought on multiple fronts. Ironically, the Southern hard right would have to agree with this tactic given their ideological commitment to state's rights. The result would be that northern and western states would adopt single payer systems and the advantages would become apparent, drawing away businesses from the south which has been attracting businesses for a long time as a result of strong anti-unionism in the region. So eventually, the South would adopt single payer systems to keep their businesses from leaving.

__________________
1977 300d 70k--sold 08
1985 300TD 185k+
1984 307d 126k--sold 8/03
1985 409d 65k--sold 06
1984 300SD 315k--daughter's car
1979 300SD 122k--sold 2/11
1999 Fuso FG Expedition Camper
1993 GMC Sierra 6.5 TD 4x4
1982 Bluebird Wanderlodge CAT 3208--Sold 2/13

What fabulous news! It's nice to see a state willing to do tho obvious thing to benefit all. The article didn't address how this is paid. Does anyone know the range of taxation increase to finance this?

I bet the insurgence thugs and their lap dogs feel the knife blade this runs into their hearts, and the best element appears that this option, according to the article, is that this is built into the ACA.