Throughout much of recorded history medical care has been limited by knowledge and technology and possibly access to trained doctors to administer treatment.  While this is still true to a degree as there are obviously still things that cannot be treated, the key limitation to healthcare in this century will be the cost to provide treatments, not technology.  Like most things healthcare is subject to diminishing returns and eventually everyone must die no matter how much we spend. 

The single biggest problem with the US system has nothing to do with "evil insurance companies" or malpractice lawsuits or any of the other boogie men being blamed for all the countries problems.  No the biggest problem with the US system is our complete unwillingness to allow measures of cost effectiveness to be used to determine treatment options.  Yes this means that we may actually have to institute real "death pannels" that determine that $200,000 to keep grandma alive for a few more months just isn't worth it.  Human life does have a value and until our healthcare system overtly recognizes this fact and acts accordingly costs can never be contained. 

Essentially we have two classes of individuals in this country.  Those that have insurance which largely shelters them from the true cost of treatment and results in them demanding that anything and everything medically possible be done to keep them or their family members alive (Anyone want to bet how long Terri Schiavo would have been kept alive if her family was paying out of pocket for her hospital bills?)  The other has no insurance and must pay inflated out of pocket costs for even minor treatments and many times don't seek care for things that could be treated cheaply and easily.  The result is some fraction of the population paying very little for healthcare and recieving equally small benefits and another fraction paying way more than necessary to get just slightly better than average care (due to diminishing returns). 

The real core questions of healthcare boil down to just 2:

How much of our GDP are we willing to spend on healthcare? 

How should that amount be distributed? 

Every healthcare is essentially a different way to answer these questions. 

IMHO the best option would be to set some level of "minimum standard" of cost effectiveness that every American would be provided.  This would ensure that very few people in the US will die from easily treatable diseases and could be considered a right in the same way an education is considered a right within this country up to a point.  Beyond that point however it should be up to the individual and what they can afford through private supplementary insurance or out of pocket for any treatment beyond the minimum.  Sticking with the education analogy this would be like college.  It is a privilege for those that can afford it.  

For those familiar with the 80/20 rule (you can get 80% of the benefit for 20% of the cost), such a plan would take advantage of this phenomena in healthcare.  The gov't could provide or mandate the 20% of the costs that privide 80% of benefits while anyone who wanted to get the other 20% of the possible benefits could put up the other 80% of the costs out of their own pockets.   

Anyway that's one way that the costs could be distributed and how I would do it if I was elected king for the day. 

The main point of course is that we need to recognize that healthcare is a limited resource (or more accurately the money to pay for healthcare is limited) and how that resource is rationed in many ways determines how gets to live and who dies.