cost of providing health care is an important factor in real life, because that money could also go to...

OK, so when you say "Personally, I say that universal health care would be worth the higher taxes," you are referring to internal resource distribution along state, national, voluntary, or other lines to achieve efficient aggregate outcomes by taking advantage of the principle of diminishing returns and taking from the rich and giving to the poor. You don't believe in a right to care, or equal treatment for outgroup non-citizens elsewhere, or that it's very important for treatment to be equal between elites and the poor. Not an unusual position, it's potentially coherent, consistent, altruistic, and other good things.

I asked for clarification from your original "Personally, I say that universal health care would be worth the higher taxes," because I think that phrasing is compatible with several other positions.