4 ms·
I can only see a first-order argument in saying "I will not pay for anyone else." There's a second-order argument of the form "We will all be better off if we
by aqme28 5y ago
I can only see a first-order argument in saying "I will not pay for anyone else."
There's a second-order argument of the form "We will all be better off if we invest in healthcare. Society is not zero-sum."
- golergka 5y agoThere's difference between investing out of your own volition and being forced to by threat of violence.
- kwhitefoot 5y agoThat's fine as long as you are willing to forgo the benefits of the things that other people have collectively paid for. If you want to opt out of taxation you should surely also be morally obliged to opt out of using roads, internet, mobile telephones, clean water, sewerage, police, fire brigades, etc. I know that it is possible to opt out of fire services in rural US but most of the rest might put a bit of a crimp in your lifestyle.
- munk-a 5y agoNot just police, but general societal protection - the fact that you can exploit people for your own profit and not get beaten up when they come back for vengeance is one of the benefits of being in a society. I personally didn't find the depiction of Caeser's Legion in fallout to be the most desirable and free society to live in, but to each their own - maybe you image you'll end up as Caeser (but you won't).
- golergka 5y agoI'm more than okay with paying for these things; in fact, I already pay for majority of them.
- wyager 5y ago> We will all be better off if we invest in healthcare. Enabling unhealthy diets is not “investing in healthcare”.