| >> |
No. 383246
>>383211
I think the difference between you and I (so far as I can tell, and I apologize if I'm misunderstanding you) is that you are more concerned with complete independence, both in taking care of yourself and not having to take care of others, especially when they may not be trying to work for themselves. (Not that you're cold-hearted, but you may not see required payments into a large system as being useful.)
Myself, even if it would cost me more in the long run (and I haven't done the math, so wouldn't dispute that), I have no problem with the higher tax rate if it means that others get the help they need. I would directly benefit by going to the doctor if I feel I need to (instead of staying home because I can't afford it and hoping that whatever the issue is is not serious/permanent,) seeking therapy for my depression (which, again, I can't afford), and not having enormous debt over my head (though not debt free, some of that is from Credit Cards); but I also benefit indirectly, because a healthy and educated public is to my benefit. I'll be less likely to catch something, those that are mentally impaired (and, especially, potentially dangerous) with no support circle can be kept off the streets; better educated people are less likely to vote in nincompoops, maintain their homes which could affect mine, and more.
But, further out than that, we need steps like this to obtain the Jobless Economy. It's not that there will be no jobs at all, but between further and further automation (which started with assembly lines, but will eventually work down to fast food joints, unmanned garbage trucks, stores installing massive 3D printers and printing items on demand instead of small, simple items being shipped around and stocked) most jobs will become obsolete. Unless the population suddenly shrinks to meet this, we'll potentially have unemployment of 50% or more. If we have changed to a society more than willing to help each other out in many different capacities, it will lead to huge trouble. You can't have 50% of the population be marketers, middle-managers, and professional members of the arts.
I can see this happening in my lifetime, but even if it doesn't it's something we need to work towards.
As an aside, I see healthcare as being a necessary service, like police and fire, and so should be a part of the government. No matter what the companies say, public health insurance is 100% about profits. In addition, healthcare can't work with any kind of capitalist system. "Hi, my leg is ripped off, I have it here, how much is it to reattach? HOW MUCH?! Nevermind, I'll call the other hospital across town and see if they're any better..." A Single Payer system will make the whole thing work far more efficiently and cheaply (per person) than anything we have now.
(Though I agree that the system you described in Canada sounds a bit silly and isn't really an improvement.)
|