When it comes to health care systems there is no evidence whatsoever that less government means more efficiency, if anything the US is a huge example to the contrary.
Now, you can see crazy waste on both sides EX: Drug Advertising. But, it's hard to look at this objectively.
Really it is only a right-wing profit-driven talking point to say government is inefficient, mostly to protect against their profits that government takes away.
Government is exceedingly efficient.
With a single payer system, at least it would be fair to lay all blame on the single payer. It'd still be beuqacratic and political, but at least there'd be direct responsibility.
Removing the regulations, at least the customer would be able to choose a provider themselves and people could sue over pricing disagreements. There would be issues with pre-existing conditions and low income that would still need to be addressed, though.
Either option is better than where we are today, which is, well I'm not sure. There's not really a term to define the mess we've created. It's not socialist, it's not capitalist, it's just a mess of special interests, political concessions, and reactionary legislation. I guess the one thing we can definitely call it is bureaucratic.
https://www.nasa.gov/ http://www.darpa.mil/
And is Healthcare.gov developed by the government or just bough to an external company? It just an observation, I don't know if Healthcare.gov is a good or bad technology.
Budget $1 Billion
1. Large government contractors: keep $400 million, outsource all work to->
2. Other government contractors: keep $200 million, outsource all work to->
3. Third party companies: keep $100 million, outsource all work to-->
4. ....
5 .....
..
10. Bangladesh code farm does all coding for $10 million.
The first head of the USDS was involved in coordinating the fixing of Healthcare.gov, though.
