Someone is paying for it. The manufacturer is not just giving it away for free. That means your taxes are going towards it.
This might be a wild take, but your taxes shouldn’t be subject to profiteering just because it’s to save lives. They should instead, at a minimum, be subject to reasonable price caps to combat racketeering.
Edit: Especially when Canada is only vulnerable to it in the first place thanks to neoliberal policies privatizing Connaught Labs, gutting their research and quality, yet still somehow increasing prices.
That isn’t contradictory with what that person said.
Things have costs, even things that are free at point-of-service. Often, those costs are worth it. It’s not as if they said that any use of tax money for any purpose is a horror.
Oh shit, blast from the past. Haven’t heard this libertarian talking point in a while.
Every time someone gets a free beer, the libertarians point out that there is no such thing as free beer. Except that’s not true: They don’t mind free beer usually, it’s almost always some social program that’s “not free”. Hey guess what: Everybody already knows that vaccines do not grow on trees. No need to explain this. Libertarians just hate social programs because they are selfish pricks rugged individuals.
Not sure why people say this like it’s a surprise or somehow bad. Paying for public health measures, or just healthcare in general is way better than where a lot of tax revenue winds up.
Not saying it’s bad that taxes pay for it. What’s bad is when manufacturers keep raising rates to pad their pockets at the expense of the taxpayer money. That means taxes are being shifted to their profits rather than other programs. GP was saying they didn’t care that rates went up because it was “free” to them.
