This is what the Soviets used to say, I kid you not.
And don't get me wrong, I am not a communist sympathizer. Far from it, I am a hardcore Reaganite for life.
But whether we have the best is debatable. Many will say that other societies are far more advanced in healthcare. One example that is touted is Iceland.
Or put it this way, if you are rich you will have access to the best. And it was the same under the Soviet system, if you were affiliated with a high ranking party member, you had the best.
I think that's going to be the case no matter what system is used. That's the way of the world. It applies to justice too.
There is a minor factor that you are not considering in that formulation: What is "the best," when? The difference in the state of the art in medicine now and a century ago is the difference between life and death for a lot of seniors, myself included. I went to the hospital a hurting puppy a couple of years ago, and the Dr. diagnosed it and readily treated it.And it was the same under the Soviet system, if you were affiliated with a high ranking party member, you had the best.He remarked that the procedure - with which I happened to be intimately familiar, but not as a patient 'til then - was invented 100 years ago. Before that, if you got that problem, you just died of it. Whether or not you were royalty, never mind merely being "rich." The temporal improvement in the SOtA in medicine - and much else - has been such that an American secretary today wouldn't be better off trading circumstances with Queen Victoria.
And of all the fraudulent claims of socialism, being "progressive" is one of the most egregious. Equality by diktat is easy, but unattractive. Bait the boobs with equality with the rich, but give them the only equality possible - making the rich equal to everyone else. But having done so, you have eliminated the incentive to rapidly improve the SOtA in medicine or anything else. And over any length of time at all, that translates into significantly poorer medicine for everyone.
Sure - the best in the USSR. But since they would always be in the process of learning from the West rather than innovating, even with all special provisions for the nomenklatura they couldn't actually have care equal to the best in the West without going to the West.
That's a bizarre comparison.
Iceland has less than 300,000 people. We have 300 million. You cannot compare the two.
We have the best healthcare system by far. If not - then why do people come from all over the world to use it?
Of course it's not perfect - but we shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater.