I have to agree with you. The "bureaucracy" argument against universal healthcare is a wash. You'll get it in government, you'll get it in business. Considering that both evolve into hierarchal systems, it's an inevitable evil.

So I laugh off those arguments.

It's also true that ANY healthcare system can be made to work. I was treated for an emergency in socialist Finland and had no problem finding competent doctors and receiving excellent care on a business trip-- at a fraction of what it would have cost me here. That's actually support for your argument, geneven-- bureaucracies add cost, so the current US system sure looks less efficient than it could be.

I've received excellent care in the US... but then, I've been treated extremely poorly as well. I've found that maverick doctors are the best for me. These are the lone holdouts against the coziness between medicine and Big Pharma. My two main doctors (DO GP and urologist) both despise the status quo because it comes between them and their work. I love those guys for that.

The absolute best care I've received was, interestingly, in a Catholic-run hospital-- back before they all sold-out to for-profit enterprise. It's anecdotal, sure, but that impacts my opinion on the subject. I think a return to the nonprofit approach would be better than either of the 2 diverse proposals often discussed these days. But, as usual, it looks like common sense and patient interest never make it to the table...