Life expectancies and mortality rates are not a good indicator of health care. There are too many factors that effect life expectancies such as automobile accidents, violent crimes, etc... I think the best way to measure the quality of health care is by outcomes, how does the system work when a patient accesses it? The study you reference put heavy weight on "fairness" in the system. Unfortunatly socialists are more interested in making sure a system is fair, rather than effective. It is shared misery. Take the UK for example. They have a more "fair" system than the US. Everyone gets the same level of care, excpet of course the elite who operate outside the system. Socalism is always for the people, not the socalists. I think the 2,180 people who are alive in the US 5 years after a cnacer diagnosis that would not be alove in the UK might prefer the US system, they might not call that a wash. That is 2,180 mothers, fathers, and grand parents. Another factoid - 5 year death rate for heart attack patients in the US is 19.6% versus 21.4% in Canada. So in the US 180 more heart attack patients will be alive in 5 years than in Canada.