Perhaps he's being downvoted (not by me!) because the claim is self-contradictory. Either a market based system "always will be better", or it could be "better if they improve the pricing visibility", which is it? Unless he's saying the US system is already superior to all others, but could be made better still. That seems like an ambitious claim.
That's a "no true Scotsman" problem, though. If the US doesn't (or didn't pre-ACA) have a market-based healthcare system, then who does? And if no one does, how do we know it's better?
