But just look at one example if you want to understand my point of view; before fire fighters were socialised, there existed a time in the US where people had to pay private companies or have their house burn down.
Now they have to pay (higher) taxes or be arrested for tax evasion. What’s your point?
Doesn’t it matter whether the amount they have to pay now is the same as the amount they had to pay then? Also, a house burning down increases the risk of other houses around it catching fire.
Dunno about fire brigades, but in the case of health care the data says that socialism is cheaper for better results.
Now they have to pay (higher) taxes or be arrested for tax evasion. What’s your point?
My point is that fires are put out because they are fires and no fire brigades watch a house burn down anymore. You think it means nothing?
Under the old system people had two choices:
1) Pay a private fire company.
2) Take the risk their house will burn down.
The new system is equivalent to the old except people can only make choice (1) and the private fire company is now a public fire department.
Your claim appears to be that the new system is an improvement even though people have strictly fewer choices.
The difference is the new system doesn’t let houses burn
Doesn’t it matter whether the amount they have to pay now is the same as the amount they had to pay then? Also, a house burning down increases the risk of other houses around it catching fire.
Dunno about fire brigades, but in the case of health care the data says that socialism is cheaper for better results.