It is my considered opinion that a public good should not be a vector for profit maximization.

Healthcare is inelastic; 100% of people will buy 100% of the healthcare they need, presuming they can afford 100% of it. It benefits society if 100% of its populace can get 100% of the healthcare they need. American society holds these ideas to be inviolate so we charge the free market with implementing them because capitalism. Unfortunately, capitalism does not reward loss leaders such as healthcare for the indigent. Thus, we end up with a patchwork of stopgaps to allow healthcare practitioners to make money despite nonprofitable patients. And the management thereof does not fall to government, it falls again to the market, that maximizes profitability against a fundamentally unprofitable business model.

The result is an antagonistic process that rewards the tenacious and well-educated at the expense of the helpless and indigent. The people most likely to get healthcare, then, are the people less likely to chronically need it. The poor will take what they can get; it's the well-educated white women who are most likely to respond with "fuck you I won't do what you tell me" which is why you don't find Andrew Wakefield serving the poor, you'll find him on encounter cruises. And you'll find that people with rippin' healthcare don't really see it as a right because they got theirs while those with a $10k deductible sit at home wondering if they really need a tetanus booster from that rusty nail that went through their bicep on set.

I've had the rippin' healthcare. And I've had the perforated bicep and $10k deductible. And unless you are actively practicing empathy you have a hard time wanting your taxes to go up so that random strangers don't sit at home wondering what tetanus feels like.

And that is a tragedy of gigantic proportions that I firmly believe history will judge us for.