Check out the doctors who take cash only
https://www.moneycrashers.com/cash-only-doctors-no-insurance...
The reason costs go up is because in some countries someone sees health insurance more as an opportunity to line their pockets since there is less transparency on how the money is spent and the pool is so big it offers temptation. But this is a problem of implementation, not the system’s concept. This is corruption where “negotiations” with healthcare providers and pharma are more about commissions and bribes so the actual costs don’t matter.
Same as with the road building I mentioned above. Is rod building soacialist?
The article is about how companies are trying to avoid anticompetitive investigations by putting the exact same product in a different box and selling it for less but only to a smaller market.
The definition of socialism is complex and fluid so finding a perfect match is tricky but I do agree that in principle there are many practices between states and businesses that would be, in the US at least, shouted down as “socialist” if they were instead between the state and individuals.
Where I live different insurance providers offer different conditions. So depending on your needs and situation you would definitely find one offer far better than another. While there may be a "fixing" component hidden somewhere the system works very well and the result is both lower bills or even none for the patients, and lower bills for the insurance company. You don't see situations where the insurance would pay exorbitant amounts to the hospital because somehow applying a band-aid ended up costing hundreds [0]. Just because a system has a social component of responsibility doesn't make it socialist. It might just make it more useful and efficient.
[0] https://www.vox.com/2016/5/13/11606760/emergency-facility-fe...
If you are getting a discount from you employer for your own products and services (cheaper Windows license as a MS employee) does this imply a socialist setup?