Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

leginfo.legislature.ca.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 468 posts

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#311

Post by r00fus »

refurb wrote: post #231
enraged_camel wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would do well to start questioning the idea that the private sector does anything "better". After all, it was them that gave us Enron, Deepwater Horizon, and most recently, the subprime mortgage crisis, which brought the entire world economy to its knees. Those are only a few examples that spring to mind. In addition, comparing the government with the private sector is pretty silly. They have different goals. Pri…

After all, it was them that gave us Enron, Deepwater Horizon, and most recently, the subprime mortgage crisis, which brought the entire world economy to its knees. That's a pretty poor argument if you line it up against gov't waste, incompetence and corruption.

I'll take it and democratic representation over corporate waste, incompetence and corruption.

In fact, the reason government sucks right now is that corporations/wealthy have rigged the game by buying representation average citizens can't compete with (legalized corruption = lobbying).

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#312

Post by Frondo »

mcbruiser wrote: post #285
mmanfrin wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[2] is about CalPERS, which is separate from the budget of the State. There may be a current budget shortfall, but CalPERS is fine (it is the largest non-country pension fund in the world; and comes in the top 10 when listed among countries). [3] mentions that tax revenues will fall because of the end of temporary tax increases; those increases are likely to be renewed. Categorizing these as 'severe budget issues' is…

> I'm sure as shit happy to pay more in taxes for a universal single single-payer. I Great, you can opt in to that, but don't force everyone else who doesn't agree with you to subsidize everyone else's poor decisions

Ok, well, as a cyclist who doesn't own a car, and as a vegetarian who doesn't eat meat, and as a childless infertile dude, I'm sure tired of subsidizing you cow-eating motorist parents.

Oh, wait, that's what society is--we all pay for communal stuff because we're all ultimately in this together.

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#313

Post by nikdaheratik »

mcbruiser wrote: post #285
mmanfrin wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[2] is about CalPERS, which is separate from the budget of the State. There may be a current budget shortfall, but CalPERS is fine (it is the largest non-country pension fund in the world; and comes in the top 10 when listed among countries). [3] mentions that tax revenues will fall because of the end of temporary tax increases; those increases are likely to be renewed. Categorizing these as 'severe budget issues' is…

> I'm sure as shit happy to pay more in taxes for a universal single single-payer. I Great, you can opt in to that, but don't force everyone else who doesn't agree with you to subsidize everyone else's poor decisions

Yeah, I'm sure all the people who chose to get cancer or be born prematurely are just leeching off the rest of us. Even if you rarely ever use the system, you're still better off having a country where people don't have to worry about going bankrupt of something terrible happens to them and they need healthcare. Also, it actually makes things easier for businesses to not have to deal with figuring out how to pay for insurance for everyone every year.

A single tax that you can plan for without worry and just get on with running your company? Sounds good to me.

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#314

Post by piedpiper_ »

hackuser wrote: post #215
mindcrime wrote: post #175

so should the government force those people to spend their earned income on healthcare for others? Absolutely not. Pretty much any question that starts with "should the government force ..." can be answered "no". You earned your income, it's yours and it should be up to you how to spend it. Using force / aggression (aka the government forcing you to do something) is a violation of your most fundamental rights, and st…

Government is "forcing" very few people. Most people participate in society voluntarily. For example, government doesn't force me to obey the law; I do it voluntarily. They don't force me to pay my bills, not shoot my neighbor, and pay my taxes. I do all that voluntarily. EDIT: I don't follow Hacker News' rules and norms because I'm afraid of being banned, but because I respect the other people here, respect that the…

> For example, government doesn't force me to obey the law; I do it voluntarily. They don't force me to pay my bills, not shoot my neighbor, and pay my taxes. I do all that voluntarily.

Yes you don't do those things because you will be sent to prison. Is it going to be Ok to send Bobby to prison because he didn't want to cover Suzi's medical bill?

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#315

Post by parasubvert »

ars wrote: post #186
IslaDeEncanta wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Physician pay (last I checked) only makes up about 20%, including the costs of them practicing. They see about half of it in the end. There is even more spent on administration, which makes up about 25% of spending. Compare that 25% to the 9% in Canada and it becomes pretty obvious where you can save money.

> Physician pay (last I checked) only makes up about 20% Does that number include specialists? Nurses? Lab technicians? If not, why are you excluding them? You basically have 4 expenses: Durable Equipment, Medication, Salary, Facilities. I suspect that Salary is the largest one, and the hardest to reduce.

Costs across the board are higher due to structural and incentive factors - more intervention, more fee for service, etc. also, specialists' income has risen ridiculously vs. GPs .

http://www.healthbeatblog.com/2008/01/health-care-s-1-2/

http://www.vox.com/a/health-prices#chart/11

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#316

Post by mcbruiser »

mozumder wrote: post #297
mcbruiser wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure as shit happy to pay more in taxes for a universal single single-payer. I Great, you can opt in to that, but don't force everyone else who doesn't agree with you to subsidize everyone else's poor decisions

That's the deal with citizenship - we allow you to live with us as long as you pay for other people. In particular, paying for people that don't make good decisions for themselves. Which is fine, since everyone is poorer than someone else. No one is interested in allowing you to live in a country without paying for it. You live under the permission of others. Them's the rules - take it or leave it.

you allow me to? so what if I stop working and pay no taxes? do I have to leave? you sound very self righteous. I assume you're a typical liberal. do you realize you're making an argument against illegal immigration?

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#317

Post by astrange »

mcbruiser wrote: post #292
hprotagonist wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>not everyone shares the same opinion and belief, so should the government force those people to spend their earned income on healthcare for others? Yes. Ideally, that's what governments should do: require citizens to act in our collective and long-term best interests, not only their own. In the case of healthcare: a healthy population is a productive, happy, and peaceful population. All of those things are good for…

most likely what will happen is people will just leave CA, leaving a shortage and it will fail

Do people migrate out of EU states with universal health care? They have free movement and everything.

I think this would actually be another great lock-in feature, on top of rent control and Prop 13 making it so nobody would ever want to sell their house.

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#318

Post by hackuser »

refurb wrote: post #278
hackuser wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These situations are common in the U.S., unless you are well-connected and can pull strings. > waiting over a year for joint replacement surgery 1) Remember that many Americans have no access to healthcare outside of emergency rooms; they wait forever. I know plenty, including connected people, who wait months for simple appointments. A year before surgery wouldn't surprise me at all. > if they have cancer, they aren…

I'm not arguing that many people would be better off. I'm arguing that many people would have to lower their expectations around healthcare. There is a very big chunk of the US that has very expensive (that they can afford) and very good healthcare.

Couldn't they still pay extra and get it? Can't you do that in Canada?

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#319

Post by DrScump »

trishume wrote: post #108
TheSageMage wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very new to the single-payer idea, but Vermont rates 49th for population in the US, California ranks 1st. I thought one of the strengths of a single-payer system was to leverage the power of large numbers to help drive costs down. Would this not make it more viable?

We even know California's population is large enough to support its own single-payer system since Canada has a slightly smaller population and a single payer system. The trick is whether the transition to a single payer system is feasible. Both in terms of taxes, and existing organizations and incentives.

"We even know California's population is large enough to support its own single-payer system since Canada has a slightly smaller population and a single payer system."

Except Canada can (for the most part) control who can enter, stay, and participate in the system, while California is at the mercy of its open borders (newcomers from other states or countries).

Re: Healthy California Act: proposal to make findings about single-payer healthcare

#320

Post by jxramos »

mozumder wrote: post #297
mcbruiser wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure as shit happy to pay more in taxes for a universal single single-payer. I Great, you can opt in to that, but don't force everyone else who doesn't agree with you to subsidize everyone else's poor decisions

That's the deal with citizenship - we allow you to live with us as long as you pay for other people. In particular, paying for people that don't make good decisions for themselves. Which is fine, since everyone is poorer than someone else. No one is interested in allowing you to live in a country without paying for it. You live under the permission of others. Them's the rules - take it or leave it.

L'Etat c'est la grande fiction à travers laquelle tout le monde s'efforce de vivre aux dépens de tout le monde. The State is the great fiction through which everyone endeavours to live at the expense of everyone else. The State in Journal des débats (1848) par. 5.20. https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric_Bastiat#Quo...
Post reply on HN