Bernie proposed to increase top statutory federal tax to 77%. Indeed, the rest is based on well informed estimates, from which I have chosen the lowest for argument.
Also, and I do realize this next bit is only loosely related because it has no chance in hell of ever happening in America, his entire economic agenda, including free tuition and his version of a GND has an estimated pricetag of a staggering 97 trillion dollars for first decade period.
Now you're speculating. I may want more coverage, but I would still prefer the choice. Or I may have a retirement visa elsewhere.
Nonetheless, I prefer to have more control over what healthcare I access and how I care for myself. You should vote according to what you want, as long as you're informed. Unfortunately, those pushing the M4A agenda do not want to answer how much they will tax. In fact they go out of their way to avoid answering it. See post #6 of this thread.
I do in fact wish to have a single-payer healthcare system, but only AFTER costs have been reduced and not before. Just like a household with low debt to income ratio doesn't go to a Mercedes dealership until dad gets a better job, we can't approve that kind of spending without the revenue. The moral arguments and the why do you care arguments aside. It's getting annoying hearing these personal arguments.
I care. I'm telling you I care. I don't want those huge tax hikes. If you want them, vote for them. That is your right. Please don't try to convince me to accept tax hikes for coverage that I do not want or need. If you have some info about how much the plan will increase the deficit (therefore requiring federal revenue) I'm very much ready for it.