There can (and typically should) be a difference in one's personal preference and what one would advocate as public policy. Of course I am more emotionally att

There can (and typically should) be a difference in one's personal preference and what one would advocate as public policy. Of course I am more emotionally attached to my own health and my kids than I care about one hypothetical unknown stranger thousands of miles away, just as you are. But if I stop and think for a moment I can't rationally justify a system that works well for 1 human (me) and works poorly for 100 other humans. As a relatively wealthy and well-educated American with great insurance (and easy access to other jobs with benefit packages should my employment situation change), yes, I benefit from the American system. But I wouldn't vote for representatives that advocated it. We're not yet approaching something that's a little bit worse for 99% of the country and a lot better for the remaining 1%, and I'm sure we will have many fun debates as to where we should balance the equation as we approach that point. I would have to be pretty selfish to vote for something that's objectively worse for most people in my country. However, it would in fact take an oblivious moron to advocate something that's simultaneously worse on average and also worse for them individually, and yet that's what we have in American politics today.