And?

Doesn’t change the fact that US prices are orders of magnitude out of proportion. You simply can’t use it as a yardstick.

Now, if you’re looking at the plain amount of material, manufacturing, infrastructure, and labour required, then you’re making sense.

But it seems you’re making the argument that too many people cost more to care for than they are “worth” in terms of economics, and would be too great a burden on the productivity of the healthy for a universal healthcare system to function.

But that’s not even close to true. Universal healthcare is essentially an attempt at triage on national scale. To apply resources where they do the most good.

In comparison, commercial market healthcare is just less efficient across the board. A universal system is able to provide more care for more people at less cost, even if it isn’t able to do so for everyone in every situation.

No-one is claiming universal healthcare systems save everyone and care for every ailment, every time. The argument is that it’s simply the smarter way to use the resources a country has.