Did the Free Market burn down the house?

Fires are something you insure against, everyone pays a small fee up front, some percentage have a fire and the large cost is borne by the many small payments from all the people who didn't have a fire. It's not cost effective to pay $75 after you know your house is on fire, that's simply not enough to cover the service provided, and that's why you take out insurance.

In any other insurance business, if you don't pay, they don't provide the cover. Is it really worse to have a house burn down than to have a child with untreated cancer?

In certain cases people feel this is inhumane, so they legislate that everyone pays e.g. Fire, Police and Health Services in most of the globe.

I found it strange that they felt the need to counter one misrepresentation of the facts with another.