It also has many more restrictions than FedEx, which affects cost. They provide services in a wider area, by law, which is unprofitable. That's why it is partially funded.
Again, it's a problem of people not wanting to pay for it, and then complaining that they are running out of money. It's the oldest political trick in the book. Cut funding or don't fund it enough, and then slam the program. Hell, I know firsthand that this even happens at the local township level.
Frankly, I trust them more with it than I trust my insurance company. Just like I'd rather have police protection provided by the government through collective taxation than mercenaries hired by those who could pay. There are certain basic services that I think ought to be part of a modern society. All the other first world countries recognize this except us.
I've been in French hospitals - they're great too. The US doesn't have a monopoly on great care, and it's certainly not the only, or the best, way to provide care.
I agree with everything you say (except the French hospitals, I happened to be there a couple of times and I'd say it's a hit or miss situation). What I am trying to convey to you is that it's the government itself that cuts funding and destroys programs. It's the government itself that makes these systems run out of money. You seem to think that the government is some sort of "noble
institution" and politicians and people screw it up. Well, politicians and people are the government. That is why I will not trust them with my health. They'll stop funding the system after a couple of years and it will become crap. Personally, I am happy with my health insurance company. I'd like more people to be able to afford what I have. I don't want to trade it for something run by the same people who are undercutting every other program the government runs.