Why Do Some People Argue Government Can Do Healthcare Better Than the Free-Market?

So one argument I have heard among many people in favor of government healthcare is that free-market healthcare is "disorganized," "confusing," "inefficient," etc...whereas a government, single-payer system, would be far more simplistic and efficient, removing the disorganization and confusing and clutter that free-market healthcare provides.

The thing that I don't get is, this is the same argument that was made back after World War II in many countries for why they should adopt socialism (the United Kingdom for example); namely, that nationalized enterprises would provide far greater efficiency and better quality goods and services than the disorganized free-market.

Today we know that this is nonsense. Nationalized enterprises do no such thing and in fact result in the total opposite, huge amounts of inefficiency. This is mainly because there is no incentive to compete. Unlike the free-market, a nationalized enterprise has no worry about going out of business. You don't like the service they provide? Tough potatoes then.

So why is it that some people consistently cling to the belief that government can provide healthcare better than the free-market? The problems in the American healthcare system are not due to the free-market; if anything, they are due to excessive government regulation. We have already seen four American attempts at government healthcare spiral out-of-control, namely Medicare, Medicaid (both single-payer government-run health insurance programs), the Massachussettes healthcare program which has been an utter disaster for that state, and Tennessee's TennCare, which ballooned way beyond projected costs.

Even without the above examples, one would think that the very fact that nationalized enterprises don't work would show that government running healthcare won't work either. Yet some people continue to believe it. I was discussing this on a forum awhile back with a friendly Democrat who gave this exact argument, that free-market healthcare is too "disorganized." I asked him, "Well people can't survive without food and need housing. Should home-building be nationalized? Homeowner's insurance nationalized? Should production and distribution of food be nationalized as well? Should we nationalize automobiles and automotive insurance as well?"

I named a few other industries in addition, and he didn't really have an answer. But I'll be he continues to cling to that view.