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

Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

sacbee.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 85 posts

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#21

Post by wtbob »

jlarocco wrote: post #17
tuxracer wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A big enough tax on fast food could probably cover it Exactly this kind of statement is what worries some about universal healthcare. I highly support single payer, universal healthcare. But statements like this undermine the cause by feeding fuel to the idea universal healthcare will inherently lead to more government intrusion into your personal decisions.

Like it or not, it's already done with cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, gasoline, and a ton of other stuff. These type of taxes are the only way I'm in favor of government healthcare programs. Cigarettes, alcohol, and junk food directly increase medical costs, and people who indulge (and over indulge) in those things should be partly responsible for those increased costs.

> Cigarettes, alcohol, and junk food directly increase medical costs, and people who indulge (and over indulge) in those things should be partly responsible for those increased costs.

They also, of course, decrease other costs due to the deaths of the beneficiaries. Is that a net win or a net loss, financially speaking?

And are you so sure of your analysis that you would use violence to take your fellow citizens' money?

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#22

Post by jernfrost »

Really weird talking about how expensive this is. Whether you pay through it out of pocket or through taxes what difference does it make? Why do Americans think there is somethink inherently more difficult with paying taxes than paying other expenses.

Weird how these people talk about health care as unaffordable but somehow there are always money for wasting trillions in wars like Iraq and Vietnam.

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#23

Post by smileysteve »

sologoub wrote: post #5

TLDR; $400 billion total, $200 billion is currently spent on subsidies and medi-cal, $150 billion is already spent by employers. The state would need to "find" ~$50 billion or ~$1,300 per resident more to fully fund this. Personally, this seems like a relative bargain and some modest extra taxes should offset the difference. Article reads pretty poorly and sensationalist. Not to mention that the missing amount is les…

Thanks for the edit. You did the math. The headline is basically opposite of what it should be.

'California cuts overall health spending by almost 50% by going Universal'

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#24

Post by jernfrost »

a3n wrote: post #11

Separate from the cost debate, the bill is labeled a "job killer," I assume because of all the insurance and related jobs lost. Which would be bad for the people losing their jobs, but they're only employed because they work for an arguably unnecessary middle-man industry. There's no "right" to those jobs, and if we can find a way to deliver health care , as opposed to health insurance , to close to everyone, we shou…

How is this supposed to kill jobs? Total money spent should be no different. It just shifts from out of pocket to taxes.

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#25

Post by jernfrost »

chipperyman573 wrote: post #2

Isn't that a given? I mean, do people not realize that the money has to come from somewhere? Of course it's going to be insanely expensive to insure everybody. Edit: I'm not arguing against Single Payer, I'm just surprised that this is something so shocking an article was written (and then upvoted) about.

If you pay 200 dollars today per month for health insurance but instead have to pay 200 dollars in extra taxes tomorrow for health insurance, what difference does it make?

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#26

Post by adt2bt »

jernfrost wrote: post #22

Really weird talking about how expensive this is. Whether you pay through it out of pocket or through taxes what difference does it make? Why do Americans think there is somethink inherently more difficult with paying taxes than paying other expenses. Weird how these people talk about health care as unaffordable but somehow there are always money for wasting trillions in wars like Iraq and Vietnam.

Yea, nobody seems to talk about it that way for some reason. If we 'save' on health care, it's either from making the system more efficient, or not providing care to people who need it. Maybe it's too complicated for a sound byte, I'm not sure.

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#27

Post by adt2bt »

jernfrost wrote: post #24
a3n wrote: post #11

Separate from the cost debate, the bill is labeled a "job killer," I assume because of all the insurance and related jobs lost. Which would be bad for the people losing their jobs, but they're only employed because they work for an arguably unnecessary middle-man industry. There's no "right" to those jobs, and if we can find a way to deliver health care , as opposed to health insurance , to close to everyone, we shou…

How is this supposed to kill jobs? Total money spent should be no different. It just shifts from out of pocket to taxes.

If you read the other parent comment in this thread, total expenditures on health care would actually drop by close to 50% overall (with a few fraught assumptions, of course). In the best/worst case, that's a $350B economic blow to those who rely on insurers for their employment. Given the complexity of the health care system around the US, I'm sure any move to universal health care will be extremely economically disruptive and render quite a few people jobless without competitive skills.

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#28

Post by Zungaron »

wtbob wrote: post #21
jlarocco wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like it or not, it's already done with cigarettes, alcohol, marijuana, gasoline, and a ton of other stuff. These type of taxes are the only way I'm in favor of government healthcare programs. Cigarettes, alcohol, and junk food directly increase medical costs, and people who indulge (and over indulge) in those things should be partly responsible for those increased costs.

> Cigarettes, alcohol, and junk food directly increase medical costs, and people who indulge (and over indulge) in those things should be partly responsible for those increased costs. They also, of course, decrease other costs due to the deaths of the beneficiaries. Is that a net win or a net loss, financially speaking? And are you so sure of your analysis that you would use violence to take your fellow citizens' mon…

Are you really trotting out the tired old taxation equals violence argument?

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#29

Post by flukus »

tuxracer wrote: post #14
jlarocco wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the headline is sensationalist. With the current spending factored in, it's really not that bad. A big enough tax on fast food could probably cover it, with the added bonus of decreasing the amount needed. If that doesn't work, then there are a lot of programs they can cut that are less important than healthcare.

> A big enough tax on fast food could probably cover it Exactly this kind of statement is what worries some about universal healthcare. I highly support single payer, universal healthcare. But statements like this undermine the cause by feeding fuel to the idea universal healthcare will inherently lead to more government intrusion into your personal decisions.

> But statements like this undermine the cause by feeding fuel to the idea universal healthcare will inherently lead to more government intrusion into your personal decisions.

Is that worse than corporate intrusion? Does your health insurance not factor these things in already?

Re: Cost of universal health care in California bigger than state's budget

#30

Post by ryanx435 »

jernfrost wrote: post #22

Really weird talking about how expensive this is. Whether you pay through it out of pocket or through taxes what difference does it make? Why do Americans think there is somethink inherently more difficult with paying taxes than paying other expenses. Weird how these people talk about health care as unaffordable but somehow there are always money for wasting trillions in wars like Iraq and Vietnam.

You should look into how much the federal and state governments pay to Medicare and Medicaid and other medical programs than compare it to the budget for the various military expenditures.

Also, although iraq and Vietnam were failures on the surface, I challenge you to put a dollar value on the pax Americana that American military spending has enabled in the last 70 years, a dollar value on the various technologies developed through military funding over the years, and a dollar value on a thriving capitalistic economy that was saved from fascist and communist takeovers by military spending.

Than maybe it won't be so strange to you why the us spends so much on the military.

Post reply on HN