Access to health care is a basic human right. Development of this right has been a quickly-evolving phenomenon over the past century. 100 years ago, health insurance was completely unnecessary because we didn't have the knowledge or technology to really effect health outcomes through health care. By 50 years ago, that had changed drastically: huge leaps were made in our understanding of disease such that health care did have a noticeable effect on outcomes and insurance was a way to subsidize access to those new technologies. Today, health care technology has improved so quickly that barring access to it constitutes a violation of basic human rights. Now, you might not agree with that, you can think that health care and the insurance to pay for it should only be available to those who can afford it, but realize that the rest of western society has moved on without you and considers that viewpoint barbaric.
Once we acknowledge that access to basic health care is a human right, there are really two main concerns in administering it across a large population like that of the US: 1) determining the most efficient way to provide health care services to hundreds of millions of people, in drastically different economic and social contexts, and 2) figuring out how to keep costs manageable, since access to unlimited care is infeasible.
Obamacare was our first attempt as a society to address these concerns. As most first attempts at addressing extremely complicated problems go, it was far from perfect. It's hard to imagine that anyone who thinks it should be perfect is arguing in good faith. Trashing the ACA entirely because it wasn't perfect is not a good faith solution. A true commitment to improving the ACA would involve identifying what has worked with the system, what has not, and then testing alternative solutions to address the systems defects to figure out which one best addresses the concerns listed above.
The Better Way plan does none of this. It basically knocks down the ACA house of cards, only to rebuild it with the same cards in the same configuration. It a political move and nothing more. The reason it does not offer a compelling alternative to the ACA is because there is no compelling alternative. Republicans absolutely know this, but they also know that they can't go back to the old private insurer market because it will be a political nightmare for them (it's very hard to take away benefits that are available to the middle-class, once they have access to them) and the alternative of a public option or single payer are even more ideologically offensive to them. So we get this Better Way plan, which is just ACA repackaged with a few Paul Ryans bitch slaps thrown in (i.e., Medicaid block grant).
What is the primary complaint of those in the ACA market? Cost. Premiums are too high. How do we lower cost? By increasing subsidies. How do we increases subsidies? Higher taxes or diverting funds from other public programs. That's it, that is what needs to happen. That is what will happen after all of this political showmanship. There is no short cut. And really, once subsidies are raised, that in itself is just a one stop in our inevitable progression to a public option, and then single payer.