I'm gonna address these point by point with opinions. lower quality of healthcare Not overall, but arguably yes for people with perfect healthcare plans at th

I'm gonna address these point by point with opinions. lower quality of healthcare Not overall, but arguably yes for people with perfect healthcare plans at the moment. I think that everyone having 90% "rated" healthcare is better than a split of 0%/50%/100% by wealth bracket. Increased government spending Yes. Absolutely - you have to tax people the money that would otherwise go to insurers and spend it as an insurer. Since the US currently spends the highest proportion of GDP on healthcare for incredibly unequal healthcare you can decide for yourself whether even big government could manage to be less efficient. Increased chances of corruption No. Creating a moral hazard of not working to earn what is consumed Sure. It's a problem when there's zero cost involved in healthcare - something many systems struggle with. Often in european countries you'll see some kind of excess/copay so people have a little "skin in the game" before using the system. The UK uses waiting lists and gateway doctors (GPs) to assess need. Rationing of healthcare on a basis of need, rather than wealth seems smarter to me from a population basis. There are many healthcare systems, all have trade offs. Most of the first world is unconvinced that the current American system is optimal