Re: Time to retire, yes

David Friedman <ddfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

In article <dc6i05dnbe3t1bkoqpafqr86tr8jtu72s0@xxxxxxx>,
Colette Reap <colette@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Edward McArdle <mcardle@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
But when you are retired, and have no dependents, you need very
little money. OK, I still live in the same house my parents moved
into in 1952.

Yes, having a paid-for house makes an enormous difference. As does
living in a country where the taxpayers rather than the patients pay
for medical care.

'[...] taxpayers rather than patients pay [...]'

What are you suggesting here? That patients have never been taxpayers?
That taxpayers never become patients?

That whether and how much you pay depends on your status as a taxpayer
rather than your status as a patient. Do you find that distinction
puzzling?

Not puzzling at all, just irrelevant.

Restaurants in Scotland, so far as I know, are ordinary private firms.
One could imagine a system where they were all free to the diner, being
paid for entirely by the government, using money collected as taxes.
Wouldn't that strike you as a substantial change?

Yes it would, but the analogy is irrelevant. It is perfectly possible
to go from birth to death without ever visiting a restaurant and being
none the worse for it. How many people do you know who can go from
birth to death and never, ever require medical attention?

--
Colette
.

Relevant Pages