Let's redefine "damage taxes"

[SaberMaxwell]

I love how I'm "wrong", yet I'm the only one making an iota of sense

Even assuming you were making sense, you consistently fail to communicate your arguments. It's not enough to say something is, a claim (especially one of fact) needs to be backed up. Given that difficulty is subjective, however, one cannot make a claim of fact to whether one job is more difficult than another.

If you'd like to argue that difficulty is not subjective, you'd need to provide an objective measure of difficulty. By every measure of difficulty SE can be shown to use, merely being able to attack from range is seen as the opposite of difficulty. Rotational difficulty certainly isn't considered, though APM possibly is, but even APM can be argued since AST does less damage than WHM.

The real irony here though, is I've been having this "Difficulty should not equal damage" argument for close to six years now, and most of that was in defense of RDM. Historically, saying "My job should do more because it's more difficult" has gotten the job in question gutted beyond recognition. See also: SMN, MNK, and yes, MCH. After the ShB destruction of MCH, I'll never trust them to rework a job again.

Obviously we're not saying to tax for VerCure.
VerCure has no place in a DPS rotation, it's a niche use just like VerRaise.

I believe understanding VerCure use case might help understand that it remains valuable but not enough to tax RDM for it.
A good example would be: GNB can heal allies during downtime with Corundum, WAR cannot due to the lack of target. Should we tax GNB for it?

There are a few ways I could go about answering this, but I'll state first that I don't think vercure worth much more than a passive mention when talking about utility. Certainly not as much length as has been gone in in this thread which is solely about how DPS should be taxed for their utility; in this case, the context of where the discussion is happening makes the "obviousness" of the statement not as tangible as perhaps perceived. I think my opinion is best stated as "Vercure is useful but in the course of this discussion we've hyperbolized how good it really is."

More often than not, even in a downtime situation, you're most likely to either step on your healers' toes or not contribute to the HPS in a meaningful way. In most DSR downtime you're sitting close enough that the healers, also freed up to use GCDs, handle it all well enough anyway that vercure is redundant at best. At worst, your vercure topped up the DRG that your WHM was gonna farm a lily off of, or your SGE was gonna do their thing to for Toxicon, and you ruined or inconvenienced their plan to have Misery/Toxicon ready to go when Thordan is back.

The only time in my six years of playing this job that I've not found it to be the case that my cures were redundant were in P8Sp2, specifically bombing people with Ifrit, and even then that was only super feasible to do when I was one of the Ifrits. I'm not saying that just because I haven't found a situation it doesn't exist, just that every time I've tried to force something to be more helpful to my healers (because at the moment there's no other reason for me to play this job), it's either been redundant or harmful in the long run.