More cute wishful thinking. See: health care. Socialized medicine provides better care for less money. Which is of course not to say that that government is always better than private enterprise, it's to say that believing that one is invariably superior to the other is just drinking a different flavor of Kool Aid.
Socialized medicine is a poor counterexample because people disagree about what constitutes "better care"[0], illustrating an important point about rule by "experts": central planners seldom know my needs as well as I do. Decentralized decision-making[1] limits the individual[2] and collective[3] impact of bad decisions, and as a bonus increases personal freedom[4] as well.
Private enterprises are just as subject as governments to the inefficiencies of separating decisions from consequences. So are families.
[0] some prefer to provide a minimal level of care to everyone; some prefer to provide a high level of care to a few; some prefer to maximize the total amount of care provided regardless of distribution; some prefer to maximize individual choice; some prefer to maximize life span; some prefer to maximize quality of life . . . In the United States, socialized medicine (Medicare and Medicaid) has failed by any of those metrics.
[1] a.k.a. a free market
[2] individual: the most my bad decisions can cost me is all I have. A government's bad decisions can lose more than we all have together.
[3] collective: when the decision-makers feel the effects directly, the quality of decision improves; this reduces the total number of bad decisions, and thus the collective impact of bad decisions.
[4] freedom: central planners need a justice system to force people to comply with their decisions. In a decentralized decision-making system people make their own decisions.