The government can't be rational about what a balanced meal looks like or how tomatoes (fruit? veg?) fit in the picture.

There's a reason food lobbying groups exist.

> Or are you saying eliminate insurers (insurance) altogether?

I'm not saying there's an easy answer, but as long as all health transactions are paying for one party's health with another party's money, we'll have bad outcomes.

If the problem is that it's expensive to live, then let's talk about that problem (negative income tax credit, minimum income, optimize for cost of living, etc.) instead of trying to bureaucracy (private or public) our way into utopia.

According to the government a slice of pizza counts as a serving of vegetables because of the tomato sauce.

This may not be what you mean, but this comment triggered a thought. If it were possible to really measure wellness and reward or punish providers accordingly, the new "health insurance" would be a sort of reinsurance that such providers purchased to control risks related to their patients' health. No, it wouldn't be cheap, and yes, the costs would be passed on to someone.