Well, it's certainly not a valid area for market economics to address, since everyone is forced to participate by virtue of being mortal. Single-payer is probably the optimum model for any advanced society, regardless of its political alignment.
The thing is, our glorious capitalistic, market-based health care system already costs us as much as a single-payer system would. We just don't get the benefits.
> Single-payer is probably the optimum model for any advanced society
If single payer system dispenses sufficient cash, the providers are happy.
But if you look in places like Eastern Europe, they started with single payer, and it's still around, but the providers figured out they could set additional fees for higher priority, nicer treatment, less crowded hospital rooms, etc. At which point the incentives got switched to the point where single-payer doesn't get you much except a place in the back of the line and access to generics.
How do you build a system that's single-payer and avoids corruption from providers' side? Providers grow to despise monopsony, and have market forces at their disposal.
The thing is, our glorious capitalistic, market-based health care system already costs us as much as a single-payer system would. We just don't get the benefits.