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

Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 387 posts

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#331

Post by AstralStorm »

anthony1617 wrote: post #267
soVeryTired wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If each time money changes hands, the government takes 27%, that means that 27% of all labor exerted in the economy goes to the government, and is spent, permanently. But the labour goes towards a government program . If the program is absolutely worthless, then you're right: nothing of value was created and 27% of GDP was "spent". But if the service was just as valuable as what each worker would have done , then n…

> But the labour goes towards a government program. I agree. I'm not saying government programs are useless. The person you replied to was simply saying that we only have $62,000 a year to spend on each person (and that's all of the resources in the entire economy) and it sounded to me like you were disagreeing and saying we had more than that. > GDP measures value added to an economy. I agree. > If the price of a pr…

In utility based sense, GDP is not a measure because one dollar has zero utility if you cannot spend it on something you need.

Even $100k can have zero utility if you need cancer treatment that is more expensive than this.

This is because service costs are usually not negotiable, and especially not privately if you have zero power.

Deriving utility from money directly is an exercise in futility.

In comparison, items can be used for the intended purpose, meaning they have utility for that and related purposes.

Money has unknown utility depending on prices and other various factors.

Without specifying purpose and other constraints you cannot actually talk about utility of any asset.

PPP adjusted GDP is better, because it relates money value to a certain basket of goods which have utility for certain common life purposes. However, the basket typically skips critical pieces like shelter (housing), clothing or indeed weighted averages of medical care. (Medical care is especially tricky because it is very heavy tailed in cost. Low probability events have huge costs, which means in normal average they're hidden. What is needed is the likelihood of a person hitting any of the expensive conditions, which can be had by binning expensive ones together.)

Not to mention if a service is paid by taxes, PPP essentially should count the cost by using the tax value split among all the free services. If it is gated conditionally, then likelihood of that condition has to be counted in. (E.g. free for people making $x or less.)

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#332

Post by hcurtiss »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #260
briandear wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How ironic that the “progressive” European welfare states have highly restricted immigration and America naturalizes more new citizens each year than the rest of the world combined. The US also allows illegal aliens de facto residence assuming they haven’t committed a significant crime. We even provide free education. If those illegal aliens have a child in the US, we give that child citizenship and subsequently make…

"America naturalizes more new citizens each year than the rest of the world combined." Source? "it is interesting that Republicans give to charity at a vastly higher rates than Democrats [1]" Where is the [1] source? " I’m sorry for people who have bad luck, but where is their family? Their church? Their local community? How is someone outside of my community or family circle my problem?" Isn't this the argument here…

Here's a source for the R versus D charity: https://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2018/11/06/whateve...

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#333

Post by michaelmrose »

hcurtiss wrote: post #305
michaelmrose wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will in fact make nearly the figure you started with for half of the median household for in my case for a household of 2. Despite your links I'm not sure how you figured the rest of your numbers despite citations. The ACA subsidies turned out to be a joke for me. A) Cheap options like high deductible plans or plans with very high co-pays for drugs make no sense if you know your medical expenses will be quite high.…

Your household makes $36k and you pay $10k for drugs on a private plan and that’s somehow a better deal than an ACA plan? Yeah, that’s not making any sense to me at all. Putting that aside, I’m not saying that’s a good life. But in the context of the article, where it’s comparing the absolute number of poor to crime rates, I’m skeptical that it’s an apples to apples comparison when defining poor in the way they do. H…

I pay 10K in total between drugs, premiums, and all other medical expenses of which about 8600 is premiums.

A plan as good in on the market in my state would have cost 1300. To be clear 1 take an inhaler which retails for $400 for asthma and my wife has an expensive chronic illness which would cost 10s of thousands to treat out of pocket. Buying a cheap plan would be disadvantageous as I can figure on trivially paying the deductible out of pocket in the first couple of months. High deductible or high copay plans just mean paying less in payroll deductions and more out of pocket.

For 2018 it was a lot less AFTER I argued for 4 months about the tax credit that initially wasn't included in the price and nobody could figure out how to fix.

This is basically a tax credit paid in installments to your medical insurance provider and is supposed to be calculated based on your expected income for the year. If in fact you make too much they can turn around and reevaluate how much they helped you and demand some of that money back. For instance they total help I received in 2018 to buy a silver plan was I think on the order of 11 or 12k this turned out to be too much by about 1k.

If as a poor person you don't actually HAVE that money to pay back they can just not offer this and then your choice is to pay $1300 for the same plan you were paying $300 for last year or pay for your employers plan.

Did you assume I was just too stupid to sign up for the ACA plan? Health care in America is a joke for the poor.

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#334

Post by 11235853211 »

mrlala wrote: post #297
11235853211 wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, just pointing out that the media often uses the term "free" when referring to public programs that workers pay for with their tax dollars. It is deceptive.

I still don't understand why you are pointing this out? You seem to be the one hung up on the word free. It IS FREE when using the public program- and that's what people want. Calling the police when you need help is free- I don't care how it's been funded. When I need it, I don't need to think about a cost whatsoever. If you are a disabled person who has never been able to work in your entire life and has never been…

You've made my point. It may not incur a personal cost at the time of use, but it incurs a cost regardless.

I have no problem understanding, I am the subject of the article. I have medical debt, and I would prefer a public healthcare system to one that charges consumers thousands for a single ambulance ride.

They call it public or socialized healthcare in nations where it is instituted. There is no such thing as "free healthcare" because workers need to be paid and supplies need to be purchased. Many conservatives will conflate "free" with "undeserved". And yes, personal transport costs add up when you are in that state and every dollar counts. It is deceptive to call something free when it actually costs a lot of money.

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#335

Post by hcurtiss »

michaelmrose wrote: post #333
hcurtiss wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your household makes $36k and you pay $10k for drugs on a private plan and that’s somehow a better deal than an ACA plan? Yeah, that’s not making any sense to me at all. Putting that aside, I’m not saying that’s a good life. But in the context of the article, where it’s comparing the absolute number of poor to crime rates, I’m skeptical that it’s an apples to apples comparison when defining poor in the way they do. H…

I pay 10K in total between drugs, premiums, and all other medical expenses of which about 8600 is premiums. A plan as good in on the market in my state would have cost 1300. To be clear 1 take an inhaler which retails for $400 for asthma and my wife has an expensive chronic illness which would cost 10s of thousands to treat out of pocket. Buying a cheap plan would be disadvantageous as I can figure on trivially payin…

Nope. Just trying to understand the facts. I know several people on ACA plans, and I do not believe your experience is representative of the majority. Nevertheless, my comments aren't targeted at you. I maintain that half the median income can vary a great deal in quality of life between different countries.

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#336

Post by blaser-waffle »

mrunkel wrote: post #138
Accipitriform wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, of course we should want single-payer, just like Canada! Never mind that the average wait time to see a doctor in Canada is almost 20 weeks, and that tens of thousands of Canadians cross the border to the US every year to avoid that wait... There are tradeoffs with everything. Personally I think people should proactively try to live healthier lives - the medical establishment is about making money, not making…

> Never mind that the average wait time to see a doctor in Canada is almost 20 weeks... This is just false. The number you're referring to is from here: "Specialist physicians surveyed report a median waiting time of 19.8 weeks between referral from a general practitioner and receipt of treatment—shorter than the wait of 21.2 weeks reported in 2017. This year's wait time is 113% longer than in 1993, when it was just…

There simply aren't medical facilities in a lot of remote / regional Canada. If you need a fairly complex or specialized surgery you're essentially going to a big city or regional hub.

Keep in mind that Canada may be huge, but has less people than California, and most of them are concentrated in a handful of places.

Anecdotal: my wife's wait for an orthopedic surgeon was 3 days... but was in a city 1.5 hours away.

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#337

Post by SubiculumCode »

mgoetzke wrote: post #113
SubiculumCode wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I support a universal basic income without means testing i.e. universal.

Me too, though in the case of big medical issues etc there will still be a requirement to somehow get more than that. Same with unemployment benefits etc. E.g a 1000 $ per person is not good enough should you find yourself unemployed suddenly. Some insurance (private or gov or both) will remain.

I believe helath care is an issue, like housing, that needs especial attention from additional local,state, and federal policies

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#338

Post by michaelmrose »

hcurtiss wrote: post #335
michaelmrose wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I pay 10K in total between drugs, premiums, and all other medical expenses of which about 8600 is premiums. A plan as good in on the market in my state would have cost 1300. To be clear 1 take an inhaler which retails for $400 for asthma and my wife has an expensive chronic illness which would cost 10s of thousands to treat out of pocket. Buying a cheap plan would be disadvantageous as I can figure on trivially payin…

Nope. Just trying to understand the facts. I know several people on ACA plans, and I do not believe your experience is representative of the majority. Nevertheless, my comments aren't targeted at you. I maintain that half the median income can vary a great deal in quality of life between different countries.

Linking health care to taxes is a tremendously stupid idea. I wouldn't be surprised if lots of people who were already on employer provided health plans didn't even look at ACA options or were poorly served.

In America if you are really poor you are fucked if you claw your way up slightly you are barely better off or worse than when you started.

I'd bet dollars to donuts that the people you know on ACA plans aren't by most people's definition poor.

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#339

Post by AstralStorm »

wheno wrote: post #141
Sharlin wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh my god, I just read news about some "centrist" Democrats arguing against universal single-payer healthcare on the grounds that some segment of the working population already gets a nice healthcare package as a benefit, and somehow it would be unfair to those people if everyone was eligible to reasonable medical care. I mean, with Democrats like that, why do you even need Republicans?

The US political spectrum is such that many Democrats are right wing by European, or at least Nordic, standards. What people tend to characterize as "utopia" is the socialist welfare state, where means are tested to a much lesser degree. What countries like Norway have increasingly done is to move from that system to a more liberal one. That is where you find yourself "begging the government for help", because you do…

Trade unions is the specific kind of socialism, others were also invented but have never really taken off. One was direct partial ownership of means of productions, such as giving out diffuse controlling stock or equivalent, paying out dividends. The other was using bottom up small societies with representatives, essentially democratic, defined by bottom up hierarchical organization, which are not across trades (sounding like rebranded corporatism) but spatial - per city or area.

Both are vulnerable to being hijacked. Financial variant can be driven into the ground by others cutting corners or essentially exploiting workers - plain corporatism. The democratic bottom up variant shares the vulnerabilities vs demagoguery but makes it harder to counter, though also more expensive to pull off. Also does nothing against special interests or basic greed.

(USSR was actually etatist conservative bureaucracy rather than socialism.)

Re: Stop Blaming America’s Poor for Their Poverty

#340

Post by idighkwjt »

H8crilA wrote: post #189
idighkwjt wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so I’ll assume that you have good and valid reasons for not liking all these things about America. Are they new things? Has America been all about this for a couple hundred years? It that how she was founded and how she survives? If you disagree with the foundational principals of the nation, you can leave. As you say, there are other countries that do things the way you want. You don’t have to fight against ou…

FYI this was everyone's way of life in the past. There was no public health care nor public pensions. Then, some nations changed, and some didn't. Who's right - I don't know, but this surely is not an American thing. It's just an old thing.

That’s just not true. The fact that there are no countries that have been doing this for hundreds of years does not mean none have tried. Look it up. Plenty have, and it meant their downfall. Now they’re not around anymore.

You can start with the USSR, various incantations in present day Germany, and many more.

It’s not a new idea, just a bad one.

Post reply on HN