Ferus

The difference is as I see it:
- Universal Health Care is paid by the tax-payer
- Proposed change makes those that benefit/profit from the gig workers(and ultimately their customers) effort pick up the bill instead.

Result: Some of it will (usually)lead to people being offered full-time jobs instead of gigs because its cheaper. If you follow the history of the development in the job-market in Europe, that is how the development is heading; Lower income, higher benefits, less tax.

The hope is that the benefits more often would be administered centrally as it is many places in Europe, so there end up being better competition between the service-providers (hospitals) resulting in cheaper prices - as proven in Europe (both EU and outside of EU)

Look at what healthcare in western europe cost, compared with the US. The income-level is 20-30% lower but the healthcare budget is almost 600% cheaper for a HIGHER level of service.

I'm not saying one or the other is better, because people want different things. But I dont mind paying the worlds highest tax (Denmark) because it gives be great healthcare, great security and nice neighbors.

I spend almost two years traveling around Europe to find a better place to live, but ended up with a apartment in Switzerland and kept our Farm in Denmark where we are building a new house, because the biggest problem here in Denmark is a few punks speeding to much on the highway.

Problem: For the above to work, the two most important things are:
1 - Support from the voters - not just one side (Can be done in the US)
2 - Low level of corruption (I doubt that will happen in the US, because the country is so divided)

So there are a solution and a path, but people dont want the kool-aid