To this:

I am *not* paying for the alcoholic who lives on the street with free access to a clinic. He may cost me a *lot more money* if he is given money to access expensive medical care for all of the illnesses he brought upon himself, due to his alcoholism. The least expensive way to deal with him is not by dealing with him in terms of his lost wages and productivity. He is not productive whether he gets care or not. The least expensive way of dealing with him is by letting him kill himself. Offering to give him bed and breakfast, prolonging his illness, just costs everybody a lot more money.

A wise friend responded:

My friend, the least expensive way of dealing with *any* chronic condition is to let the person die. You wouldn't apply the same logic to haemophiliacs or diabetics, would you? If you're arguing that alcoholism is some sort of conscious choice, then I'd have to ask, how many times have you heard a young person say 'well, my ambition in life is to be a homeless brown-bagger'?

Preventative health care is aimed at educating people to look after themselves, to understand how their bodies work, to avoid 'quick fixes' and temporary 'cures' and dependence on pharmaceuticals. It frees up resources for those who need more specialised care. It creates a baseline where most people are mostly healthy, and therefore more productive. And, in purely pragmatic terms, it means there are fewer sick untreated people going round infecting the healthy ones, and making *them* less productive.