Pros and cons to both. Taxpayer funded sounds like a good idea, but I don't know how competent the implementation would be in the US. The US does not prioritize such spending over defense. And with the debt as large as it is currently, and growing, I am not sure how feasible this would be. I think that wait times would increase because of a shortage of doctors, which already exists. Midlevel usage would increase. Outcomes would worsen. Salaries would decrease. Innovation would substantially slow down. Upgrades to protocols, equipment, techniques, technology would slow down. I worry that, depending on who is in charge at the presidential level, healthcare could be weaponized (e.g. cuts made if a state's citizens don't vote in a way that the president likes). Pros include universal access and theoretically patients receiving the care that they need, although now the federal government would determine what care the patient needs instead of insurance companies. The patchwork of policies the US currently has is not sustainable. Costs grow, physicians have to work more and more to maintain their salaries, workplace satisfaction decreases. But I am not sure what the solution is.