4 ms·
>For example if you end up needing to live in a rest home and your family can't afford or refuses to take care of you, why should my tax dollars go to help you
by wang_li 7y ago
>For example if you end up needing to live in a rest home and your family can't afford or refuses to take care of you, why should my tax dollars go to help you out?
Your tax dollars shouldn't. I would have to be a real asshole who has no empathy and care for you to live my life in a way that I end up destitute in my old age and expect you to sacrifice your family's well being so I can live my life selfishly and greedily.
>As many countries have justifiably chosen, they consider this to be an extremely barbaric approach.
You might phrase it like that, but every single day in every single country that provides a generous safety net someone dies whose life could have been extended by some amount of time if only the country had spent more money on doing so.
- fzeroracer 7y ago> You might phrase it like that, but every single day in every single country that provides a generous safety net someone dies whose life could have been extended by some amount of time if only the country had spent more money on doing so. This is a nonsensical argument. Said safety net is often the reason why people don't die, because as a whole it's cheaper to prevent people from getting to the point of destitution than it is to pull them out of it. And your first argument is nonsensical too. Because a lot of the time it's simply a roll of the dice whether or not our health nosedives. By your argument if you get in an accident, you would be an asshole to expect other people to help you out in a time of crisis. That's not having no empathy, that's having a nihilistic worldview and expecting everyone to subscribe to your 'every person for themselves' mentality.