We’ve seen it in recent months here in Minnesota and several times the past four decades in the federal government — politicians pandering for tax cuts. Time and time again, these tax cuts always result only in enriching the wealthiest people and corporations. And guess what? They are the ones who pay for those politicians. Imagine that.

Enough of that cutting-taxes-puts-money-back-into-“regular”-people’s-pockets hooey. You want to know what would do that for working-class families and small businesses, something that Congress can do tomorrow, something that would keep small businesses and regular folks from bankruptcy and the poorhouse?

Medicare for All.

The United States has one of the highest costs of health care in the world. In 2020, U.S. health care spending reached $4.1 trillion, which averages to more than $12,500 per person, according to the Peter G. Peterson Foundation.

More than 62 percent of all U.S. bankruptcies were medical bankruptcies, according to World Population Review. Medical bankruptcies are virtually unheard of in every other developed country, where health care is funded by a national pool of taxpayers. No out-of-pocket costs. No deductibles. Nothing like that. Ask someone in Denmark, or Sweden, or France, or Canada about medical bankruptcy. They wouldn’t have the foggiest notion of what you’re talking about.

But back to the 335 million of us. There is literally no financial downside to us with Medicare for All. We’d save $12,500 per year in health care costs, less a small amount to pay for the system. Let’s see Congress or the state Legislature cut taxes like that for all of us.

The nonpartisan think tank Urban Institute estimates Medicare for All would cost between $32-$34 trillion over 10 years. That still puts us ahead by $6-8 trillion. Anyone for cutting the deficit? Or getting serious about climate change? How about feeding the hungry, housing the homeless or, here’s a novel idea — healing the sick?

It’s the best way to cover every American while holding down escalating health care costs, which along with medical bankruptcy is another area in which the United States dominates.

Imagine the leverage the government would have in providing comprehensive health care services, pharmaceuticals and treatments for 335 million people.

There are non-financial cons to Medicare for All, like a slow transition period and potentially more health care system congestion, but it would give you time to think about how you would spend that $12,500 annual windfall.