Critics of a single-payer healthcare system argue that it could create more problems than it solves, especially in a country like the United States, which already spends about 17–18% of its GDP on healthcare—more than any other developed nation. They point out that replacing private insurance with a government-run system would likely require major tax increases, which could simply shift costs rather than reduce them. Evidence from countries with similar systems, such as Canada and the United Kingdom, also shows that while coverage is more universal, patients often experience longer wait times for non-emergency procedures due to increased demand and limited resources. Opponents also argue that a single-payer model could reduce competition and innovation in healthcare and pharmaceuticals by placing more pricing control in the hands of the government. Finally, they warn that transitioning to such a system would be extremely disruptive, affecting millions of workers and fundamentally restructuring one of the largest sectors of the U.S. economy.