OP is a privileged take, yes. If you touch grass in poverty spaces, disability spaces, etc., there are a lot of preventable things that could be done or mitigations that could be made that would reduce future costs to society and individuals in incredible ways but are not done because people lack the resources to pursue them. The insurance model is flawed in practice for young, healthy, male IT workers yes, but that's just a testament to how broadly flawed it is that even those positions of privilege are being failed by it.

Big picture: As a society we are failing to make investments in population health that would pay off and an industry exists in a position that it is directly antagonistic to social good. Medical bankruptcies when an under-insured person has a catastrophe is a failure. A person avoiding preventative or corrective care that will improve their future because in the present they need to pay rent instead is a failure. The market dynamic on private insurance creates pressures that produce these failures as a matter of course. Maybe single-state-payer isn't a perfect way to do this (I am pro-social but also a minarchist), but the private insurance model is obviously worse, and there's probably some solution to the holistic problem but we're incredibly bad at whole-system and whole-population thinking, accounting for "undesirables", and probability around unlikely catastrophe, (and propagandized into being even worse at these things than human psychology alone would allow) so any solution which is optimal is likely to be incredibly unpopular because at the individual optimistic case level it'll feel like it's "infantilizing" people or creating individual disincentives for "repsonsibility" or whatever, and that's before we get to the part where we have large populations of people who are so comfortable with hierarchical systems of exploitation that they are afraid improving things substantially means their currently-comfortable above-water status in the pile of drowning rats might be threatened.