Simple: I have no idea how any other country has enough money for single-payer health care without tax codes that badly hurt the economy. How do they make sure all citizens have free health care forever with no new taxes and avoid creating a federal deficit?
Also keep in mind most countries do not have 330 million people. Even Canada has less despite its bigger geographic size.
I'm trying to wrap my head around someone being a Democrat and being dead set against "new taxes" so arbitrarily... And the fact that I have to explain this to another Democrat...
Taxes - new or not - pay for things that benefit us. Public services that are best served through a not-for-profit, centrally organized government source. For example, garbage collection. I know people who live in towns where garbage collection has gone from a service paid by taxes to a "pay it yourself" system. They have to buy bags, they have rules to follow, and they pay more. Some people pay another hauling company even more. They have freedom of choice but in the town's analysis it costs more per person to pay their own way than it did for the town to provide it as a service. But their Republican mayor and council decided to go this route. So now my friend who lives in that town pays more for his garbage removal than he did when it was through taxes (about 30% more) plus he has to go through hassles of dealing with their obnoxious rules.
With healthcare, look at the current system of private insurance and compare it to the other current system of Medicare and you'll have your answer.
Private Insurance:
Employees pay about 1/3 of the insurance premiums (average $6-7,000 a year) and their employers pay the other 2/3 (about $14-15,000 a year). On top of that, the costs/prices charged to private insurance companies are much, much higher because each company negotiates a price and based on their limited buying power they pay higher prices (i.e. they don't get bigger discounts). This is why prices and costs are higher in the US than anywhere else in the world (except for prices charged to Medicare patients which are lower). And for this high cost, here are the added benefits: you get to argue over claims that they don't pay, you get to pay for insurance company fatcat execs to take expensive vacations, the claims you don't get paid become bonuses for the execs and profits for the isnurance company, and you must have an employer who offers you the benefit so if you're not in the right job or your lose your job you become vulnerable. Also, every doctor, hospital, and health service out there must hire additional staff just to deal 100% with these private insurers to get their payments, and that affects our prices which go up for everyone.
Medicare:
Nobody is profiting. There are funds set up that pay for Medicare which all pay into through a payroll tax. Medicare negotiates much lower prices than private health insurance because their customer base is so large that they have massive buying power. Medicare rarely argues or denies claims (if they do it's often a billing or clerical error that is easily resolved). Very little extra staff is needed to deal with Medicare - that's why hospitals and doctors are generally happy to deal with people on Medicare. And with Medicare you have it regardless of whether you are employed or unemployed, or if you freelance, or if you run your own business, etc. Everyone just has it.
Also, factor in the fact that when you have people who are uninsured, we are all paying for that one way or another. For many poor people we pay through our taxes for them to get Medicaid - so we are already paying that through our taxes. For those who aren't on Medicaid and have no insurance at all, if they go for treatment to the ER, they will get treated, they will get billed, and if they can't pay, the charge will be written off, the health provider will have a loss and will then raise prices for everyone else (US again!) so we are paying through the higher prices that way. So, we have 2 options - we can be a society that doesn't provide any health services unless we know up front they can pay (even in ER situations) or we can be the society that helps anyone and then worries about payment later. If we continue to go with the latter, it makes sense that we do what's best in dealing with those who can't pay, and that is to include them in the health system through tax-paid healthcare.
Well, I can go on but that should be more than enough. We can cover everyone for far less than it costs right now. I'd rather pay $5,000 a year through taxes and have everyone in the nation covered for everything than pay $7,000 with my employer paying $14,000 (Not to mention my deductible of $7,000 more if I do get sick) and with all that money being spent I can still lose my coverage, I can hit limits, I can get denied for claims, I will spend lots of time fighting to get reimbursed and so will my healthcare providers, I will still pay for other people through my taxes and higher prices... It's no comparison.
An example:
My mother was on dialysis. We would get the monthly bill and it would show the non-Medicare price of $100,000 a month. It would then show the Medicare price - $30,000 a month. And then it would show that covered by Medicare and paid. That's it. Easy, covered, safe. Less cost to the taxpayers (us) for the same services.
If we have to convince Democrats that Medicare for all is the best way to go then we have massive problems and Democrats have gone far to the right.