The Walmart/Whole Foods analogy is so completely inappropriate to this topic that I would say it's "Not even wrong". The author placed it literally at the heart of their article (paragraph 5 of 10) and after positing it, concedes "Such a low-cost alternative does not exist for most of medical care." I wish I could say I "see what they were trying to do here" but honestly am too confused by it. Are they seriously trying to clarify basic economics? The prior paragraph was basically "People like having better options when they can afford them".

Don't get me started on them using the Mean(!!!) household GDP of $155,000. (just to clarify: using the mean here dramatically misrepresents the average American because the mean includes billionaires. the median for 2017 was $61,372)