[gugagore]

It's hard to compare the meaning of a wage change across two countries with what I understand to be very different social programs.

One of the biggest reasons that I would like to be wealthy is so that if I or someone I love gets sick, I can avoid going bankrupt to get treatment or forego treatment because I can't afford it.

That's a fairly realistic concern for large swaths of the US population.

[lillecarl]

Fair enough, I guess in a way we already have the extra taxes you're mentioning, If anyone needs medical assistance they get it (Mostly, they refuse to fix my grandmothers knees because she's still able to walk (in pain)). But anything lethal will always be treated, or young people with fixable issues.

[gugagore]

I'm curious. Do you think that if your grandmother had more wealth, then she'd be able to walk with less pain? Or is it a case where the treatment/cure might be worse than the disease?

It's very immoral to allow (force) people to die, when they otherwise could live if they have more money.

It's less egregious, but still immoral to allow (force) people to live in pain.

I think it is a much more complicated issue to balance medical "expertise" with patient desires. If your grandmother wants a treatment and her healthcare providers believe she should not have it, not because it affects their profits, but because it's medically ill-advised, then what?