Not really. Every human being can survive with the same minimal allotment of food and housing, but that's not true of health care. Some people will use very little while some will use a lot more through no fault of their own.
You're still free to choose who you get healthcare from.
It's like saying the food/farming industry isn't a free market because "some people will use very little while some [fat people] will use a lot more through no fault of their own." It's a ridiculous argument, and sounds more along the lines of Peter Joseph's "structural violence" mantra. The whole "you're not truly free until you get all this free shit given to you so you can be free to do nothing/be lazy".
Granted, it isn't actually a truly free-market, anyways. Government subsidies, minimum prices, etc, all distort the market and affect peoples' actions.
I hear what you're saying and agree in part, certainly where things other than health care are concerned. Both sides of the argument are deeply flawed. The fact remains, though, that we in the US pay more for our health care and get less in return for it than residents of countries with real "socialized medicine." We are indisputably doing it wrong. We owe it to ourselves to consider the problem more deeply than we can by comparing it to traded commodities like food and housing.
