The example obout your local hospital was interesting, the main thing I was looking for was the issue of prioritisation. When you decided between nurses and trauma units you were discriminating against people who needed one or the other. Discriminating due to the reality of limited resources. How did you go about that, knowing it was not 'fair' to some, that it was not egalitarian but more an effort to be utilitarian.
Where is the line drawn that says "you cannot receive help because...."? That was the purpose of my question.
Incidently a county full of poeple could 'collectively' buy, create and run a hospital (roughly, and inefficiently, that is what tax does). The issue seems important to you and you indicate that it is for "others living in the county". I dont understand why the people didnt buy the hospoital or build one and ignore Sutters attempts. Thats what used to happen on many occasions prior to welfare, medicare and NHSs came into being. There are accounts of it in late 19th and early 20th century history (at least I read about them in some magazine, Time I think.). I think you could have done this, I think you still could. So why isnt it happening? Thats an interesting thing to consider dont you think?