The nine percent was people who buy direct from private insurance companies, not through an employer.

You are correct that a private company has some costs that a totalitarian monopoly does not need. Advertising to attract customers in a competitive free market. Free samples to do the same. Do you really think the savings will be worth it? It would be far more efficient and less costly to our society if we only had one brand of every product. Is that an improvement? Who gets to pick?

You think a government health care monopoly won't deny care? In fact, Medicare denies a higher percentage of claims than almost all of the major private companies do.

Social Security has no real administrative costs. It's not a medical program. Benefits are paid on a simple set of calculations, same for everyone. Nobody has to decide case-by-case if a Social Security check should be cut for someone or not.

I did not support the idea of the government investing Social Security funds in private stocks. Again, who picks? I do support the idea of people deciding for themselves how to invest their own retirement, and having an asset they can leave to their children. I would support a phase-out of Social Security for younger workers while continuing existing benefits for those nearing retirement. There would be a tax penalty for the young for a while, but someday it would end.

Currently, both Social Security and Medicaid are going rapidly broke, and that's just with a minority of elderly using the programs.