Faulty reasoning. Given a choice, far too many folk would choose to avoid paying their way…and not just with healthcare. Differences apart, the similarity among other developed nations is that contributions to the healthcare system aren’t left to the individual to choose if they pay. Some flexibility in how much personal coverage they opt for to varying degrees, maybe…but not if they make a contribution.
There’s a reason for that. When too many members of of a community are sick and unable to receive medical attention, the whole community suffers. So, although a cursory Google on the topic of “how does France/Germany or Switzerland etc fund medical care?” will pitch up mention of “insurance”, you’ll also see mandatory in the general description.
P.S…just imagine if the flexibility to deny coverage allowed insurance companies to refuse, say, Medicare Advantage plans to any Medicare beneficiaries who had any track record of the preventable diseases mentioned as contributing to the high cost of healthcare…and subject all supplemental plans to similar medical underwriting. Or, say, discrimination were allowed in judging whether medications were subsidized depending on previous lifestyle choices…say insulin or statins secondary to metabolic syndrome in the overweight and sedentary. You can bet the (unimaginative) young, healthy and the Good Custodians of their body would be very fond of voting for these restrictions, given a choice