If you don't do something, comparing tax rates between countries is meaningless when you get different things for those tax dollars.
I think the developed world (minus us here in the US, of course) has finally realized that access to health care is a basic human right and should be included.
The primary reason that some people push back against this notion of health care as a "basic human right" is that it is an example of a "right" that can only be provided by force. And by force I mean that the only way it can be "guaranteed" by the government is for the government to forcibly collect taxes to pay for the services. Forceable redistribution is required. Perhaps even forcible job assignments (nurses, doctors, technicians, etc) if you really want to make sure the right is provided equally to everyone (ratio of patients to doctors, etc.).
In contrast rights such as freedom of speech, assembly, press, religion and so on can be guaranteed through inaction of the government. Nothing needs to be taken away from anyone to guarantee these rights. Basically this is the difference between positive rights and negative rights.
One large problem with bucketing positive and negative rights together as "basic rights" and insisting that the government must guarantee these basic rights is that it becomes difficult to identify a limiting principle. If health care is a "basic right", then why isn't "food" or "shelter" or "clothing"? How would we go about guaranteeing those things?
Please don't interpret my comments as suggesting that reasonably priced health insurance and accessible health care services aren't important. They are, but there are ways of structuring those services and socializing some of the costs that don't require that they be considered "basic rights".
It is interesting that you qualify your claim that health care is a "basic human right" to the "developed world". Does that mean that it is not a "basic human right" in other parts of the world? Why not? If it is a basic human right, shouldn't it be protected universally? And if you think it should be provided universally who should be responsible for providing that right outside the developed world? And if it there is some complex economic conditions that are pre-requisites then is it really a "basic human right"?
> It is interesting that you qualify your claim that health care is a "basic human right" to the "developed world". Does that mean that it is not a "basic human right" in other parts of the world?
You misunderstand. I personally believe that everyone has a right to access to healthcare. My point was that the developed world has finally decided (for the most part) to recognize and codify that into law and taxation, whereas much of the less-developed world has not (to be fair, a decent amount of it has, though).
I think the developed world (minus us here in the US, of course) has finally realized that access to health care is a basic human right and should be included.