>The US does not have a monopoly on high quality health care, and what use are the best experts if they're too expensive? It's not like you can have your pick of the US top experts as long as you're insured in the US.

Go do a google search for something like "best children's hospitals in the world." I challenge you to find a list that isn't at last 75% US hospitals. Most are over 90% US. If you have something that warrants it in the US, you're going to get into one of those hospitals and you're not going to pay anything.

>Our population is healthier, which probably helps keep costs down.

This not only keeps costs down, but also keeps health stats up. Your life expectancy is probably a lot better than ours, but you also have much lower obesity rates. People often cite our health outcomes with any context at all. Context matters. The fact that over a third of our population is obese matters. And not having to pay a copay isn't going to change that.

> Go do a google search for something like "best children's hospitals in the world."

So I did that, and noticed something weird. Here's a list of '30 best'

http://www.topmastersinhealthcare.com/30-most-technologicall...

So, the weird thing? They're all in English-speaking nations, with the exception of one that is in Israel (which has strong medico-political ties with the US and a lot of English speakers anyway). The whole of Europe outside the UK doesn't rate, not even Germany or Sweden.

The problem with these kinds of lists is that they're so Americo-centric to begin with, most probably because they're written by Americans. It's like how the "World Series" in baseball has only a token attempt at including other countries.