2 ms·
>reasonably well kept and healthy people are receiving little to nothing for their money in the present Even if I never use public health services my entire li
by fennecfoxy 4y ago
>reasonably well kept and healthy people are receiving little to nothing for their money in the present
Even if I never use public health services my entire life (I mean I obviously already have) I'd still be happy to keep paying that tax.
Why? For the same reason that I don't mind as a gay man who will never have kids that my taxes also go to: welfare/benefits for families in need, helping children, building/benefiting infrastructure I will never use.
All of humanity is in this together, on this tiny blue sphere. If people are focussed only on maximising things purely for themselves and not others at all, then have we really progressed at all as a species?
- maerF0x0 4y agoto be clear my point wasnt about maxima, but about imbalance. IMO Rejecting someone preventative care ($1k tops), when they give $18K to the system is a broken balance. The claim/demand is not $18K in, $18K out.
- fennecfoxy 4y agoOh, definitely agree with you there, then. I guess it is troublesome because the money has to come from somewhere at the end of the day. Someone like that shouldn't be denied but I guess it begs the question of what happens if in a certain year demand for medical services outstrips allocated tax. I suppose govs should really have a slush fund for that sort of thing rather than national debt/constantly feeling they have to spend all tax money, every year.