Thats the wrong way to think about it though man, if you make it universal and managed by the government, then the government and big insurence companies get together. This eliminates the smaller insurence companies which means less insurence choices for consumers. In parts of the US now you dont have but one choice for healthcare insurence. Much the same as how in some areas certain ISP's have monopolys. When this happens they can set prices to whatever they want because the consumers in that area have no one else to go to. Government might make it appetizing for awhile and give Subsidies but just like Medicare/Medicaid and social security its going to just run up the debt with no end in sight.
This basically guarantee's profits to those insurance companies government has chosen as "winners" so of course they are happy about this. At the same time it stymies development and eliminates competition within the healthcare marketplace. This is what happened with the housing market when government butted in, and as i said previously thats what led to fannie/freddie failing and being taken over by the Feds.
Competition has always been the main driver of development and the lowering of costs which means more choice for consumers and lower premiums. The ACA does the opposite of this.
