I'm guessing you don't live in a rural area in the US.
I said in another reply, I’m all for the state and the federal government helping rural America where their own tax base isn’t strong enough. I’m also for universal health care that would help rural areas far more than me. I wouldn’t complain about my taxes paying for it.
It’s rural America that keeps voting for local, state, and federal politicians that put them in this place.
In my experience, not everyone's primary policy goal is to ensure that as much taxpayer money as possible gets redistributed in their favor.
Of course, this isn't to say that the problem you described (of people wanting government services but not wanting to pay for it) does not exist, but I find that to be applicable broadly, not just to rural America.
Are you saying they don’t want hospitals near by because that means they would have to accept government help? I’m sure even providing basic infrastructure is coming from funding from sources outside of their community
People live out here knowing full well that the nearest hospital is 30 minutes away and if they need to call an ambulance it's probably going to be at least 15-30 minutes, maybe longer, before it shows up.
If someone is having a heart attack are they going to refuse to go to hospital that is backed by the federal government?
It's kind of how I feel about Social Security. I'm not going to refuse it, especially since I have paid into it my entire working life. But I'd rather it didn't exist, and I know it isn't sustainable.
Then they beg the president for handouts because they can’t sell their food they are producing.
It’s only socialism when it helps someone else.
The Democrats spent the beginning of the 2016 cycle all pretending to be for universal health care (literally the only reason why Buttigieg and Harris got on stage), then spent the rest of the cycle dishonestly campaigning against it while fixing a primary. As soon as Bernie lost, health insurance and healthcare stocks had their highest stock price bump in history.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...
I agree with your opinions on government funding, I just find it gross when it's used as an excuse to put the blame on the powerless. The powerless are not powerless because they choose to be, they're powerless because they are restrained by the powerful. Not only is the information they receive about the world restricted and their educations propagandistic, but if they voted for what the powerful didn't want, their vote would be ignored.
On the other hand, you've been convinced to blame the powerless for the crimes of the powerful, so I don't know how you're any less of a sucker. I guess you're wealthier than they are, so maybe you're a support system for the people doing the suckering.
edit: I had to add the last, because this type of argument is something I consistently hear from people who are paid to do the exploiting. If you're a thief, you figure out a way to blame the people you steal from.
Bernie’s ideas were way too left field for me and I consider myself to be a bleeding heart capitalist pig - ie let companies make money, tax them and use the money to provide a safety net. Also take away the idea of your insurance being tied to your employment
We have paid police, because we want law and order. We have paid dump/collection center workers, because you need a place to take trash. We have paid teachers and school staff, because we want a good education for our kids. We have paid road maintenance workers, because it's really helpful to have properly maintaind roads. We have paid librarians, because libraries are one of the core community centers in the area. We have paid animal control workers because rabies is scary. We pay for ambulance service because sometimes you need medical attention asap.
And we have volunteer fire fighters, because stopping fires, in a rural, wildfire prone area is, what? Optional? Just a side gig? Something you do just for fun?
A big part of the confusion people have is that "volunteer" fire departments often include pay. It's not a full-time job, but they at least get paid for their calls. That's not always true, though, and it's weird. It's an artifact of history that our different layers of government have divvied up basic services amongst themselves in a way that leaves fire fighting as a local concern that may or may not involve paid professionals, while the sheriff and local police will be paid professionals, the roads will be maintained, and the school will have teachers, and principals, and custodians, and people running the cafeteria, and so on.
Why do we not have "volunteer police force"? Because we treat it as a full-time position for career police officers. It's weird that this one, very critical service uses "volunteers," while most of the others are full-time, paid positions, and I find it confusing and weird, despite having grown up in rural NC, just outside a town of under a thousand, and now live at the other end of rural NC, outside the limits of a different town of under thousand people.