Personally, I support single payer where the cost is spread according to income. ACA is just an acceptable, though not great, compromise, where the poorest among us get some break, some in the top tier of the middle class and above get hammered. I have little concern for the second part. I am happy for the first tier.
The real problem here are those people at the limit of the subsidy domain, who are generally better with an ACA contract in the long run but right now may have a hard time finding the money to pay for it.
The problem with contracts a la carte is what happens if you get sick of a disease not covered by the contract. Do we let those people get sicker and die if they cant pay? If not, who is going to pay for it? This is why the whiners who can pay tire me. I want to focus on those who cannot pay.
It is also a question of mentality. Democrats in this country are to the right of the RW parties in Europe and most of the world. Healthcare is a right. If it is a right, we must be sure that people have access to care. We must have a central entity negotiating prices for the people. We are not yet there. We need to get this step running and then make the system get better. Destroying it will not help.