Your inefficiencies are someone else's revenue.
Or to say another way:
Healthcare is ~20% of US GDP
Reduce spending by 40% would reduce US GDP by almost 10%. That's a tough sell politically you have to admit.
No, it wouldn't, because most of that would go straight back to labor and result primarily in increased consumer spending, and secondarily in increased consumer investment (which leads to increased business spending.)
It's not like the money not being spent on healthcare inefficiencies is going to just vanish out of the system.
But that's not really analogous to eliminating health care inefficiencies.
It's like a natural disaster or oil spill: there is good chance a natural disaster or actually increases GDP short term. People aren't better off for it however, since that money could have been spent better elsewhere.
http://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/08/broken-window-fal...
Not to mention you're actually making a point for not giving GDP too high a value when looking at economies.