That's because if you run critical services like a generic for-profit business you almost automatically exploit everyone who is in it for more ethical or intrin

That's because if you run critical services like a generic for-profit business you almost automatically exploit everyone who is in it for more ethical or intrinsically motivated reasons. There is a big disconnect between why you'd do the doctoring and hospital-running vs. the admin side of things. Once a business has a certain size it all becomes the same: bottom line, marginalisation, and bubbles of speculation under the name of financial management. The issue with doing that to healthcare is that you have to recoup your business failures in a way that is incompatible with saving lives; i.e. you have to make things more expensive to get your money but since for the people at the bottom of the chain that means having someone die vs. live they will not really be give a choice; choosing between getting healthy (but paying a butload of money) and getting dead (so you don't have to pay) is basically extortion. A lot of excuses are made that 'you pay for what you get' meaning the quality is super high and thus expensive, or that the cost is very high, and that has to be calculated in to the prices, or that the business side is very hard and complex and can only be done that way; but unless they have unicorns and rainbows we don't know about those excuses are just that: excuses. The cost is high, and the quality doesn't match it - almost all healthcare systems in other developed countries is both higher quality and cheaper at the same time as well as having lower mortality rates. Exploiting people that are intrinsically motivated to help people who put their lives their hands is just another sign of the administrative side of this deal completely doing it wrong. The same people, buildings, services, machines, procedures in a different country with a better end-result and lower mortality rate should be enough proof.