Response to Universal healthcare will save 5k per family

Response to https://twitter.com/SansaRising/status/735432914230489089

Wrong in so many ways. Of course with theft (taxes) the thief (gov) can benefit from it and they can share the bounty (wellfare). You're still forcing someone to give you money instead of offering them value in return for what you want. "If we'd let people choose, nobody would pay taxes", yea because gov doesn't provide value. You're basing this on the false assumption that everything else will stay the same, what will at least change:

1. Telling people upfront you're going to steal their stuff means they will try to hide that stuff (tax avoidance).

2. Demand is controlled through price, if you lower price to 0, the demand will go up massively. Because the supply is still limited (gov funds) the demand will now be controlled by waiting times, instead of price. Do you like waiting in line for many hours? https://www.doctorsoftheworld.org.uk/blog/entry/why-people-in-the-uk-are-dying-from-lack-of-healthcare. You might think demand can only rise so much, because there's a limited amount of people, but the free health care brings in many extra immigrants. Look at the ones who are already in socialist France but still desperately want to go to the UK.

3. Health care quality will go down a lot. Currently doctors are motivated to do a good job so patients will trust them and come back when they have problems. When you overflow doctors with unlimited patients and limited resources, they will be motivated to choose quantity of quality, that means rushing things. I don't know if this story is true, but it's what I would expect: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2161869/Top-doctors-chilling-claim-The-NHS-kills-130-000-elderly-patients-year.html. Doctors only have limited resources, should they use large amounts of them to help old people who will die soon anyway? Or prioritize the young?