Regarding the Universal healthcare/education debate, do you think we should phrase it as how much the government should spend on it?

Ad_Quid_Orator
Often times I hear people saying that universal healthcare and secondary education is wrong because you shouldn't make someone pay for another persons' education or hospital bills. The problem with this argument is that tax dollars already fund public universities and hospitals so the question about making those services universal isn't whether or not the government should pay for them, it's whether the government should pay foot part or all of the bill. Also, if you're against universal healthcare and education because you shouldn't be forced to pay for those services when provided to others, are you campaigning to cut government funding cut to public hospitals and universities?
Regarding the Universal healthcare/education debate, do you think we should phrase it as how much the government should spend on it?
1
6
Add Opinion