Which is different from single payer healthcare. In many Western Democracies, universal health coverage is brought about through the use of private companies.
Why does no other developed nation have the old US model of healthcare? Because in the US model, before the reforms, insurance companies used death panels to deny care to those they were meant to cover. And then they raised costs [1]. Not only does the USA spend more on healthcare than any other nation [2], it finds itself bottom of the table when it comes to preventable deaths due to treatable conditions when it comes to developed nations [3]. The sad thing is that rather than focus on these things, the right spreads lies and half truths about the reforms and how healthcare works abroad [4]. Even sadder is the fact that the reforms are so simple [5]. But, if you think that my points are wrong, e-mail me with proof.
Private healthcare. The only kind of medical insurance that should be legal and available is catastrophic medical insurance that covers cancer, heart attacks and major surgeries. This would immediately lower health care costs because people would consume less of it. Now, everyone who has a policy runs to the doctor for every little thing. And doctors and hospitals and drug manufacturers and medical device makers charge big bucks simply because they see a bottomless well of money that's east to tap. Finally, a mix of public and private health care will simply degenerated into universal healthcare. Anything the government touches grows into a monstrosity and a failure.
A Mix is good. Well... Private healthcare is for profit so the more people they deny for procedures or healthcare the better. Government run healthcare is inefficient though.