Or, and I'm going out on a limb here, and we could have a thing called a "democracy", where we jointly decide to pay for health care for everybody. And then we could come up with some sort of system for sharing out the costs of the joint project in a more-or-less equitable fashion.
Right, this is what I proposed. We should democratically agree to use the threat of violence to steal money from everyone to pay for medical services for everyone.
More like: we agree together to set up a society, then people in it have to follow the rules. If you don't like that, there are rules that let you change the rules.
Actually, if somebody else is paying for me, that's inequitable. I like to pay my way.
That something is subjective doesn't mean that it's unknowable. Justice is subjective, but that doesn't mean we should abolish the courts and the police. Those institutions will never be perfect, but we can nonetheless always work toward perfection.
First off the courts and police have nothing to do with health care. Secondly, the courts don't dispense "justice", and judges will tell you that first thing as you arrive for jury duty. They dispense the law.
So? We have sewage systems, but their purpose is health. Imperfect systems are how we work toward ideals.
We evaluate the legal system in large part by whether the outcomes are just. For example, the revision of the three strikes law in California is happening because a number of people have received obviously unjust sentences. And we got the law in the first place because many people thought that letting serial offenders free to harm people again was unjust.
"Equitable" is another one of those ideals, and that it is just as subjective as justice or health. But we can work toward it.
