Both aspects of this, choosing who is taxed and choosing where the money goes, are political choices.
The choice is not "agenda" vs. "no agenda", it's "stated agenda" vs. "tacit agenda".
The choice is not "agenda" vs. "no agenda", it's "stated agenda" vs. "tacit agenda".
You could argue that we shouldn't use the political engines to do this, but that quickly runs against the fact that politics just means people, at large. Is why even "scientific communities" would have disagreements on what should be prioritized.
I do think we could do better, but I hesitate to offer a concrete better way due to my own ignorance in knowing of one.