Barack Obama has pledged health care for all Americans. And despite our economic woes, expect him to press forward while the opportunity presents itself. With large Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, now is his best chance.

To coax citizens to buy into such a huge expansion of government, he will cite 45 million uninsured, then seek to blur the distinction between not having medical insurance and not having access to medical care.

Folks might be tempted to nod approvingly when they hear these politicians say that America is a rich and compassionate nation and free health care for all is a no-brainer; that if not for heartless Republican-types, the people would already be in health care nirvana.

But no-brainer solutions to complex social problems do not exist. Social policy cannot solve problems; the best it can do is trade one set of problems for another. Society’s challenge is to determine which set of problems is most tolerable, then make the most intelligent tradeoff possible.

Just as falling apples are governed by the law of gravity, market activity is governed by laws of supply and demand. This is the inherent problem of universal health care. Anytime a product or service is offered at no cost, supply cannot keep pace with demand.

While the number of doctors, nurses, hospital beds, operating rooms, MRI machines and so on is limited, demand for service is not. When health care is an entitlement, yet all service-providing resources are already being utilized, the only option is to create waiting lists.

Imagine if government provided free auto insurance. Many folks would call the body shop whenever a shopping cart blemished their paint. Swamped service providers would have no choice but to require everyone wait their turn, even those with inoperable vehicles.

While President Obama seems oblivious to the inevitable downsides of their universal health care plans, leaders of countries with such systems know them well.

Sweden, having had socialized medicine since 1946, is thought to have the most trouble-free system. But, consider the case of Goran Persson.

Persson fractured his hip in 2003, and was required to wait eight months for a hip replacement surgery. As he awaited surgery, he was forced to reduce his workload and take increasingly strong painkillers.

What made Persson’s situation unique was not his wait, but rather the fact that he was Prime Minister of Sweden at the time. Though he could have used his position to jump ahead in line, it was not in his political interest to do so.

Luckily for Persson, he was not Canadian. Then, he would have had to wait another 60 to 90 days (Fraser Institute). And in the UK, he might have had to lose weight before getting on a list at all.

Americans have no waiting lists. Patients get their surgeries within days, not weeks or months. No wonder more Canadians have hip replacements in Cleveland Ohio (at their own expense), than any location in their own country.

To control the huge costs created by unlimited demand, physician choice and treatment options have to be limited. The pay of medical professionals is also constrained, routinely creating market shortages. The UK has had to import tens of thousands of doctors. In Canada, they had to ban private practice altogether to keep doctors roped into their system.

Then, there is the tradeoff in liberty. Not long ago, many of us applauded as the US government fleeced the evil tobacco industry on the grounds that their contribution to the poor health of Americans impacted government health programs like Medicaid, Medi-Cal and Medicare.

That principle establishes that once you give government responsibility for your medical care, they will take control of your health care. In other words, in return for medical insurance, they insist on dictating your lifestyle.

The London Telegraph tells of John Nuttall, a citizen who was refused ankle surgery from the National Health Service because he could not quit smoking. The hospital required Nuttall, who had purchased National Insurance stamps all of his life, to cease smoking as a condition of surgery, citing a study that found smokers healed slower than average.

Big government advocates argue socialized medicine is the only way to deal with 45 million people in America without health coverage. But, in Uninsured in America, filmmaker Stuart Browning details who makes up this population. Almost one third of the 45 million are eligible for Medi-Cal or Medicaid but have not applied. Another third are illegal aliens. Among the rest, nine million have incomes over $75,000 a year.

Some Americans do lack access to adequate protection from catastrophic medical expense, often due to preexisting medical conditions. A remedy is needed for them alone. The rest of us need to fully recognize that the tradeoffs in both quality and liberty are far too great for a government health system to be considered.