That's due to ACA, which is only about 7 years old and has an uncertain future. The cancer survival rates are a few percentage points better in the US than many

That's due to ACA, which is only about 7 years old and has an uncertain future. The cancer survival rates are a few percentage points better in the US than many other countries, but this is not uniform and still depends upon your level of insurance. If you are uninsured or underinsured your survival rate is significantly less than if you are fully insured. The "everything plus the kitchen sink" approach isn't ideal in all scenarios and the US healthcare system has a high level of overtreatment, often with potentially harmful interventions. It also pushes up the cost for everyone. However there are economic models that provide for a high level of universal healthcare equal to what the US has now and also cost less than the US spends right now. The difference is that is moves from a combination of clear personal cost and obfuscated public costs, to purely public costs and many in the US seem opposed to that relatively minor shift. It also means the politicians are even more responsible for their society's healthcare and I imagine many of them don't want that responsibility.