It sounds like a big chunk of a lifestyle, something like 30% of my lifestyle is food and shelter. What do you want to call it?
And that isn't really germane to the debate. If someone is relying on the government for basic food and shelter they aren't going to be able to hold a candle to someone who is economically independent. One of those two is just more important and respectable than the other.
> usually, they're just taking out a bit from what they've already contributed to
If you see taxes as some sort of savings program then fair enough, but then would you have objections if people like me opt out of paying into that part? Because I reckon I could set up an insurance program that would cost a fraction as much. Pretty sure I'm paying for a lot of people who haven't contributed as much as they are taking out (and I'm pretty sure most people think that is the point).