Well, there’s more than one problem since real ‘everyone’ creates more efficiencies that ‘some subset of everyone’ fail to create. But the biggest problem is that ‘all who want it’ is a false alternative to employer provided healthcare just like the ACA marketplace options creates an illusion of choice for anyone who doesn’t qualify for a subsidy.

My employer pays a lot of money for my health insurance plan. Like 14,000$ a lot. I pay another 3k. If the ‘all who want it’ platform wins and opens Medicare enrollment to everyone, do I want it? I can take my three grand and look at Medicare, just like I could take my three grand and look at the 750$ a month plans on the marketplace. Oh, or the 1000$ a month plan. My cheapest ACA option was six grand a year more than I’m paying today. And when the company increases their contribution next year and therefore doesn’t increase our salary? I still get nothing, even though they’re not paying anything for my insurance.

So am I a “who want it”? Either the Medicare plan — health insurance, emergency, and prescription drugs — is going to cost less than three grand {and my employer still gets to pocket fourteen grand and call my raise an increase in their contribution to healthcare premiums} or I have the “choice” of paying thousands more for my healthcare. I’d happily pay a couple hundred bucks extra for better insurance. I’d happily take the seventeen grand that’s being paid for my healthcare today and buy a Medicare plan. But there’s no way Medicare is going to compete with employer subsidized coverage.

And I think the “all who want it” proponents know this — set the Medicare for All system up for failure, and the for-profit insurance industry can continue unchanged.