If it were up to Whole Foods CEO John Mackey, he would get rid of all our single payer systems — Medicare — single payer for seniors, Medicaid — single payer for the poor, and Social Security — single payer for retirees.

Yesterday, Mackey was at the Cato Institute — the libertarian think tank that he said he and Whole Foods supports.

At Cato, Mackey said he would shrink the government to less than ten percent of what it is today.

The implication — get rid of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Why won’t he admit it?

Because Mackey is the CEO of a very profitable corporation.

And his libertarian values clash with the values of the majority of his customers and workers.

So, for example, last month, after Mackey referred to Obamacare as “fascism” on National Public Radio, he was quickly forced to apologize.

We met Mackey when he arrived at the National Press Building and we asked him whether he wants to get rid of Medicare and Medicaid and Social Security.

“I’m not making any statements about Medicare,” Mackey said.

But Mackey says over and over that the American people need to have an honest conversation about the size of government that we want.

So, we tried again — let’s get rid of Medicare, right?

And Mackey said — “I’m not going to answer that question, so you might want to stop asking it.”

Why?

“Because, I know what you are trying to do,” Mackey said.

Which is get Mackey to admit what he’s trying to do.

Get rid of Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

Mackey was at the Press Club for a book event.

He was there with Raj Sisodia, a professor of marketing at Bentley College, and co-author with Mackey of their new book Conscious Capitalism: Liberating the Heroic Spirit of Business (Harvard Business Review Press, 2013.)

And it became clear during the question and answer period that even Sisodia didn’t understand what his co-author meant by “limited government.”

Press Club moderator Alan Bjerga went to questions from the audience — written on cards and passed to Bjerga.

“An F word hangs over the room and it has seven letters,” Bjerga started, as Mackey shook his head in apparent disgust.

“At the Cato Institute yesterday, you said you would shrink the federal government to ten percent of its current size,” Bjerga said. “You applauded the privatization of Social Security. . .How would one go about shrinking the size of the federal government to the size you would want it to be?”

As Mackey is about to answer the question, Sisodia interrupts and says to Bjerga that at Cato, Mackey said he wanted to cut the government “by ten percent” — not “to ten percent” of its current size.

“There’s a big difference,” Sisodia said.

Bjerga looked at Sisodia and said — “I’ll take your word on this one” — and waved the question card, indicating that he was relying on a question from the audience.

But it is clear from the video and audio at Cato (here at 40:20) that Mackey would shrink government “to ten percent” or less of what it is today — not by ten percent, as Sisodia put it.

Bjerga should not have taken Sisodia’s word for it.

“I do believe in the minimal state, which is ten percent of what our state is or even less than that,” Mackey told Tucker Carlson at the Cato Institute. “We need the government to protect us from external invaders. We need police. We need some final court system. And they are like the umpire. They need to set some rules and regulations toward markets working more efficiently.”

Nothing about social safety net there.

Mackey accused “anti-business people” of suffering “ideological lock in.”

And you, Mackey?