Why does it always have to be this OR that here? Why don't y'all try something like here in many European countries, where the government has an obligation towards its citizens (why else would there be a government anyway in the first place) for minimum health care/retirement benefits, on top of which people can get an additional insurance if they have the means to do so. So EVERYONE gets a decent minimum, and richer people get better treatment because why not. What's not to like about a system like that that truly benefits EVERYONE?
The whole "If I don't want it, I have to be able not to pay for it" isn't logical. At that rate, school should be entirely private, which will have huge social costs for ALL of society. Here a "personal insurance" is obligatory: because if you cause an accident, people must be sure that in one way or another you will be able to pay the bill. Same reason why you can't drive a car without an insurance, no bs about "I don't want to pay an insurance and I'll live with the consequences": if accidents could be avoided by using personnal responsability there would be none, and the costs are generally way too high for an individual to cover.
@
DEAD7 you bring up some good points and all but some stuff just doesn't make sense. Because by your logic I should be allowed to decide whether or not I want to pay for police, public infrastructure, public education, the army, etc. Some stuff just can't work that way,because the fire department ain't got time to check your receipts before saving your burning house. It's not always about checks and balances and deficits or whatever, a country's purpose is not to make money.
No mandate would increase the likelihood of people running red lights and would therefore increase vehicular fatalities. In this simple (for some) example, government initiating force has a positive net benefit towards society. So, for you to run around screaming about how any initiation of force is morally wrong, you have to concede that even basic governance such as traffic laws are against everything you stand for. Obviously this is an untenable position for you, so mental gymnastics ensue
Alright lets concede this example. I'm certain there are many instances where force can have a beneficial effect. Does that then make it moral?
are you just arguing just to be arguing?
Everyone should be responsible for planning for the rest of their life, not counting on the govt. to do it for them. Again take responsibility for your own life.
