So how would you do it? Healthcare free? Then how do you distribute a limited resource with an unlimited demand? Well, some would say that doctors should be slaves - work for no profit and at the whim of government. Some say the government should pay for everything. So everyone should have access to million dollar procedures.
No one said doctors should be slaves. I know enough in the medical community here and none of them feel like 'slaves'. There is a difference between providing basic healthcare for all and providing for 'million-dollar procedures'. Besides, if a procedure still costs 'millions' then maybe its tech etc. needs to be 'changed' (resources better allocated) to find a way to provide a similar service that doesn't cost anyone 'millions' or introduce a two-tiered system where a person can choose the 'free' but possibly inferior procedure or pay for the possibly better procedure.
The problem with those who say as you do is simple. Economics. How do you distribute a limited good with an unlimited demand.
Those 'countries' with a 'public health care' have the same problems. If you follow the news, you hear the horror stories. Surgeries taking years instead of weeks. People put on waiting lists and dying to gin the metrics. Simple procedures never done because your number is not up.
The problem with those who say as you do is simple. Sociology. How do you keep filling jobs no one wants when those who would do those jobs get sick and die.
These 'countries' with a 'public health care' have a solution to that. If you follow first hand accounts, you hear the truth. The collective of the nation is healthy enough to work, to pay bills/taxes and to help the nation through these tough times. Putting the nation ahead of the individual is certainly not everyone's ideal but the overall results speak for themselves.
My first-hand experience with such a system is this. The wait-times are atrocious. For non-emergent care (ie. a tetanus shot at the hospital) you could be waiting 8 hours or more on some days. My wife recently had to wait 8 months to get an MRI of her ankle (which is filled with arthritis and the local orthopedic surgeon has told her fusion is the only thing he can do for her......she isn't happy to hear that). When I was in a bad MVA with a drunk motorist many years ago and got ejected from the vehicle the various surgeries necessary to put me back together were sub-par by American standards I'm sure. I am alive however, and I can walk again etc. When my grandfather passed away at 90 he passed away just a month shy of the scheduled heart surgery date that had been set about a year previously. In all fairness his family is confident the surgery likely wouldn't have extended his life much.
The point of all of this 'experience'? Not my wife, I or any of my grandfathers other family would want our 'public' healthcare currently being offered to our citizens to go away. Are the wait-times atrocious? Sure. Are there abuses within the system? Yes. Is there room for improvement? Always. Many people I'm sure would support a two-tiered system as referenced above if it could be implemented properly, but I'd be absolutely shocked to find anyone would actually support our current system to be abolished and be replaced by the American system.
Healthy people make a healthy workforce. Should that not be the objective of every nation?
...and to finally take this back 'on-topic'. Yes. Keeping a robot cashier and/or a 'burger machine' healthy costs a lot less than doing the same for a human. So I guess all of the above is quickly becoming moot anyway!