But I still disagree with one thing:

I would completely support free healthcare if unlimited money managed to grow on trees…

The central question is how to allocate the health care that’s being produced by the medical system. The reason governments can’t do this job is that they have no mechanism to figure out the value of one good or service versus another, to one person or another. Money is the market’s mechanism for assigning value and allocating scarce resources; unfortunately, expanding the amount of money in an economy (inflation) without increasing the amount of goods and services produced just means that everything will have a higher nominal price, with the additional negative effect that the first recipients of the new money – the government’s favored class, if government controls the money supply – will be able to obtain goods and services at close to the low old prices, while people who don’t receive government payments will have to pay the high new prices. Even worse, an unlimited money supply or one approaching it (hyperinflation) will make it impossible to assign value to anything, and people will stop offering goods and services for sale. Today, doctors tend to be reasonably well compensated for the work they perform. But if tomorrow they’re offered worthless paper for it, they’ll stop doing it, and every one of us will suffer and many of us will die – including me.

While I know that your idea of money growing on trees was at least partly facetious, I actually cherish money’s scarcity.