There's that insulting tone again where my opinions are somehow unthinking knee-jerk reactions as opposed to educated, informed and historically verified.

You should go back and read the emotive image you posted. ;-) Since you named the UK may I point out that even the head of the UK Conservative Party describes the NHS as a "national treasure." Even the arch-capitalists see it as a marvelous win. How does that fit with the image you portrayed? I don't see the leader of the US Republican Party describing your current system as a national treasure. Basically the image doesn't match real life. And that's before we start comparing your image of "subservient populations" to the French, Austrians, Scandinavians or Dutch.

If you look outside of government for incentive driven, free market solutions you may see elements and mechanisms that resolve your fears.

You do realize that many systems with universal schemes also have a successful private market? Some of them currently offer "medical tourism" options where somebody facing a $200K procedure in the US can take a 6-week vacation abroad and then have the prcedure done there for a total cost of around $40K. I'll let you explain how the cost can be 80% less if your system has so much to recommend it. The satisfaction ratings for people taking these trips are looking phenomenal as well.

LOL. They cannot produce anything of the sort, because what they've written doesn't look anything like what they've claimed.

I'm referring to the criticism of socialized care as a principle and the belief that the existing system has all the merit. On that note you might be interested in some of this: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/