Most folks posting on this thread tend to over simplify the concept of transition to a single-payer health care system. They focus on the cost, or where savings would come from, or what doctors are paid. Here are a few points I'd like to make and upfront I am strongly in favor of single-payer.
First, even with single-payer, no one is forced to use it. Anyone can still pay physicians directly or get health insurance or get supplemental health insurance because like Medicare, single-payer would only cover about 75% of costs (Silver Plan).
Next Medicare, Medicaid, VA health plans all go away. That cost gets rolled into Single-payer. Single-payer covers everyone birth to death. Also, there is no longer a need for employer based health insurance unless the employer wants to provide a supplemental plan. Consequently the $500-$1000 a month out of your paycheck goes away and the employer doesn't need to worry about the cost of health care. They are off the hook for the expense.
The flip side of that is single-payer will require premiums , likely based on income, that like Medicare, would be a payroll deductiion.
The majority of doctors favor such a plan. Already Medicare is a major source of income for health care providers since the sickest people tend to be old. Most people on Medicare are happy with it.
Regarding wait times. The long wait time argument has no merit because in single-payer there is a triage system. The sickest people get treated first, not the wealthiest. It is the correct way to manage delivery of care. People with money would still be perfectly able to go to a private physician and get their high cost care more promptly.
Lastly the cost. It's complicated. There are many variables. This is not a bad analysis. As you can see a lot depends on the details. However, one thing is clear. Overall it would cost less and every citizen would be covered.
https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...1/how-expensive-would-single-payer-system-be/