It's simple, really. If I drive a brand new car that's expensive to repair, I'm likely to carry collision insurance
in addition to the standard liability coverage. But, if I don't mind driving around with a few dents in my fenders,
I'll most likely choose to skip the extra monthly premium for collision coverage and just take my chances.

Likewise, if I'm a normal, healthy, broke 25 year old, I would probably rather not pay each month to be covered for
regular checkups, colonoscopies, and hair transplants. Instead, I would choose a high deductible plan with
catastrophic coverage in case of emergencies, and pay for anything else out of pocket.

The problem is that when government mandates coverage, it then gets to define it. So you end up with legislators and lobbyists, rather than consumers and doctors, deciding what kind of care qualifies as "acceptable." Suddenly every medical procedure and piece of equipment has its very own well-paid lobbyist whose job is to convince Congress that whatever they represent is ABSOLUTELY necessary. And you think health care is expensive now.

Have a little more faith in people. I don't know about you, but I'm perfectly capable of deciding for myself what I want to buy and when I want to buy it.

Likewise, how does encouraging individuals to ration their own care make sense? Having individuals avoid trips to the doctor's office or the emergency room based on their own judgment and desire to save money increases the risks that a cold turns into pneumonia and an expensive ICU stay or that odd pains turn into treatment for cancer or heart attack. People should not be making these sorts of decisions in ignorance as an attempt to save money. While there are some that go to the doctor frequently, most people would rather not waste their time going in the first place unless they think it is necessary.

A free market system works to cut costs and serves the consumer when individuals have the knowledge to make intelligent choices, to choose when to make their purchases and can choose whether or not to even make a purchase. With health issues, an individual has none of these options in many cases, especially when the health issue is severe and consequently, the costs are high.

If free market were to be an option, it would still need significant regulation to ensure minimally inclusive health packages without coverage cutoffs for fundamental care and would need to protect individuals against being denied coverage for existing conditions.