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

Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 556 posts

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#171

Post by ordinaryperson »

fsloth wrote: post #58
ordinaryperson wrote: post #18

Universal health care is a euphemism for the poor and sick getting their medical care subsidized by the wealthy and healthy. Morally, caring for the sick seems like the right thing to do, but it's like when I hear Bernie Sanders call for "free college education": he doesn't mean free, he means the wealthy subsidizing it for others. Universal health care implies just distributed costs, but the focus should be on bring…

I'm from a country that has public health and free college education (Finland). I much prefer paying bit more in taxes than having to have a bad conscience knowing that a lot of the people living in my country would not have the same options as myself. I'm not exceedingly wealthy but I make more than the statistical average employee.

Yes, the problem is American universities, like hospitals, are severely overpriced.

There are many reasons for this, but it's easier for Finland to pay collectively for higher education when the tuition is reasonable.

Just like my healthcare argument -- if we could bring down the cost of higher education then subsidizing it for everyone would be less controversial.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#172

Post by rogerb »

SamReidHughes wrote: post #146
rogerb wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a simple thought experiment that helps: - an american citizen break his leg, he is not insured. Do you A: let him die B: take care of him ? if your answer is A - you are a terrible person, but you hold a consistent position. if your answer is B - the only question that remains is what is the most economic, efficient way to take care of this person ? b is universal health care. if you think you can do A with e…

What if they're not an American citizen? What if they're also in a different country?

My position is to take care of that person, like weve been taken care of visiting while other countries, but trying to avoid the illegal/undocumented immigrant strawman for clarity.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#173

Post by Consultant32452 »

rogerb wrote: post #131
sykh wrote: post #6

When a person gets a life threatening disease they ought not worry about whether or not their treatment will leave their family in penury. This is especially so in a nation as wealthy as the U.S. The American healthcare system is immoral and I hope it drastically changes. Americans need to change their underlying notions of what it means to be a society. An author was once made fun of for suggesting that it takes a v…

There's a simple thought experiment that helps: - an american citizen break his leg, he is not insured. Do you A: let him die B: take care of him ? if your answer is A - you are a terrible person, but you hold a consistent position. if your answer is B - the only question that remains is what is the most economic, efficient way to take care of this person ? b is universal health care. if you think you can do A with e…

The most economically efficient way to pay for B is to allow the free market to drive the cost of care so low that the person is either able to pay for it, or the cost through charity is trivial. This has the double benefit of not attempting to rectify one moral wrong (person does not receive care) by committing another (violent coercion by the state).

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#174

Post by imglorp »

e40 wrote: post #79
merpnderp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think the private healthcare system is immoral, you should take a look at the 100% government ran healthcare system that is the VA. You literally couldn't make up worse things than their administration has been caught doing with little or to consequence. If the VA is the best the US government can do, with some of the most sympathetic citizens, then it is incapable of doing better than our private system.

This is one of the straw men that is often brought up. There are a million reasons why the VA is messed up, most of which have NOTHING to do with healthcare. Congress has underfunded our troops for decades, related to healthcare and not. Something as simple as body armor is often purchased with personal money. A woman that works for me is high up in the Marines and I hear stories that disgust me. I do not know how Co…

I'm curious why there are more than one public health system. There's the VA, the IHS (Indian Health Services), and of course medicare/medicaid. Why are these not all the same system? It's not like we're different species....

edit, If this is a benefits/paperwork thing, then shouldn't that be separate from the care provider network?

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#175

Post by sykh »

creaghpatr wrote: post #164
sykh wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people on TRICARE don’t seek to leave the system, do they? That’s a government run healthcare system. Do Medicare recipients seek to leave it? That’s a government run healthcare system. Universal healthcare can be implemented poorly but it doesn’t have to be. It can be done right. There are lots of examples of this.

>Do Medicare recipients seek to leave it? No, because it's free, but 1/3 of Medicare recipients opt to receive their coverage through private insurers that typically add on additional coverage, an indicator that Medicare alone is not enough for a large segment of the population, or that they prefer a private insurer even with government subsidization. https://www.kff.org/medicare/fact-sheet/medicare-advantage/

Excellent. We are in agreement that the American government can and does provide a health insurance program that covers lots of people and has the property that people don’t seek to leave it.

Perhaps the idea that everyone be covered in such a system is not so far fetched.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#176

Post by ordinaryperson »

arcticbull wrote: post #156
ordinaryperson wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Wasn't there a writeup recently that wealth distribution isn't materially distinguishable from luck? Some researchers in Italy created a computer model of human talent and ran a simulation. Not sure you can model talent, but more importantly that argument means no one is really successful, just lucky. Steve Jobs: no talent. Jeff Bezos: no talent. Barack Obama: no talent. All just luck. > If someone is too poor to g…

> Steve Jobs: no talent. Bezos: no talent. Obama: no talent. I'm definitely not saying that. What I am saying is that their talent had to be coupled with an immense amount of luck, being in the right place at the right time, and things falling in line just right for them. > Again, I'm not wealthy, so these taxes would not affect me. But I'm not sure you're correctly modeling transmission vectors for communicable dise…

Obviously, I'd like everyone to be healthy and with an affordable education. But our universe is finite and someone has to pay for these services. Just blindly assuming we can tax all wealthy people into total equality seems like a pipe dream to me.

Hence, I'm arguing that instead of just blind wealth transfers from one group to the collective we should focus a lot more energy on bringing the cost of care down.

Just like we should be focusing a lot more energy on bringing the cost of college down.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#177

Post by conanbatt »

Pharylon wrote: post #134
conanbatt wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think emotional arguments are a distraction, they're the whole point. This is a moral issue. I find the moral argument to be disingenuous. It is immoral to make poor people pay a tax that cure the diseases of rich people. "Nobody should go hungry, so everyone should be able to eat anywhere they want and not look at the tab".

Disingenuous? You think people arguing that it's immoral for someone to die because they were born poor are not actually sincere in their argument? Tell me, what is my evil ulterior motive? Do I actually just want to increase taxes for the hell of it?

Of course its not a sincere argument: I believe that you can believe it, but its insincere at least to yourself to say that the reason healthcare should be universally provided through government is for the poor. If you cared for the poor the argument is to make food stamps for healthcare services, not universal. Universal is also for yourself. So yes, it is disingenuous to say that which is best for your is also best for the poor.

Reminds me to the typical argument that college should be free so poor people can go, but ultimately, middle class and up go. Healthcare is similar: the richer live longer, which means they live more of the most expensive healthcare years.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#178

Post by SamReidHughes »

knieveltech wrote: post #159
SamReidHughes wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if they're not an American citizen? What if they're also in a different country?

What if they aren't? Are there criteria that can be met that make the decision to leave someone injured on the side of the road morally sound?

We aren't on the side of any roads here.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#179

Post by chimeracoder »

sykh wrote: post #101
merpnderp wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think the private healthcare system is immoral, you should take a look at the 100% government ran healthcare system that is the VA. You literally couldn't make up worse things than their administration has been caught doing with little or to consequence. If the VA is the best the US government can do, with some of the most sympathetic citizens, then it is incapable of doing better than our private system.

The people on TRICARE don’t seek to leave the system, do they? That’s a government run healthcare system. Do Medicare recipients seek to leave it? That’s a government run healthcare system. Universal healthcare can be implemented poorly but it doesn’t have to be. It can be done right. There are lots of examples of this.

> Do Medicare recipients seek to leave it? That’s a government run healthcare system.

Since you asked - yes, yes they do. Medicare patients can opt to receive their inpatient/outpatient benefits from a private insurer in lieu of traditional Medicare benefits, and an increasing number of people do so.

Privately managed Medicare plans, incidentally, outperform Medicare on the three key performance indicators: medical outcomes, cost, and patient satisfaction.

Re: Both in rich and poor countries, universal health care brings huge benefits

#180

Post by F_r_k »

malyk wrote: post #153
merpnderp wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are toll roads not close to efficient? In my state the toll roads are by far the nicest best maintained roads and the tolls are extremely reasonable and collected without having to slow down or stop at a booth.

Imagine your city is a grid...N/S streets are numbered, E/W streets are lettered. Toll roads wouldn't be efficient if 5th-18th ave are toll roads (operated by multiple companies/agencies) and then Fst-Hst and Ost-Xst were also toll roads. You'd never be able to get across the city.

Except if you have interoperability laws in effect (like in Switzerland you can take a bus, a boat, or a train with the same ticket, yet they are different companies).
Post reply on HN