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

No One Goes There Anymore

noonegoesthereanymore.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 322 posts

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#151

Post by PaulAJ »

xondono wrote: post #136
magicalhippo wrote: post #30

When I see about half my paycheck going to taxes it feels a bit rough. But then I think of stories like this, and how easily it could have been me with an illness requiring expensive medical treatment and possibly preventing me from working regular jobs. And so I pay my tax with pleasure, knowing that if something were to happen to me or my fellow citizen, at least there wouldn't be millions of dollars in hospital bi…

I pay 50% of my shitty income in taxes and then have to pay for health insurance on top of that because public health here is useless. Public health is not a panacea, although I’m happy for the people who get a good deal out of it.

Where is "here"?

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#154

Post by sokoloff »

PaulAJ wrote: post #147
sandworm101 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never said my friend had a job. Part of the problem, in the US, is the link between employment and insurance. My friend earned reasonable money as a moderately-sucessful artist but did not have an employer. In the US that would mean paying out of pocket. In canada he didn't have to pay a dime.

Also the self-employed in the USA have to pay over the odds for rubbish schemes. Large employers can be assumed to employ mostly healthy people, but an individual is more likely to want health insurance if they already know they are a bad risk. This "moral hazard" means that selling health insurance to the self-employed is a money-losing proposition unless you screw them at every opportunity.

I’m no fan of health insurance as currently instantiated, but I don’t see it as screwing them at every opportunity if they are actuarially unprofitable otherwise.

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#155

Post by sokoloff »

sandworm101 wrote: post #116
rayiner wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problems in this country also cannot be solved by empty rhetoric about “taxes being too low on the wealthy.” Taxes on the wealthy in the US aren’t dramatically lower than in Europe. The top tax bracket in Germany is 45%, versus 37% + state. So if you live in any of the 9 states with a top state bracket of 8% or higher, including New York and California, the top income tax bracket is actually lower in Germany. Cap…

>> Taxes on the wealthy in the US aren’t dramatically lower than in Europe. Apples and oranges comparison. The US government is fundamentally different concept of national government. Between healthcare and the military, US per-citizen spending it far beyond, as European examples, Germany (more than double). In short, the US has to tax more because its government is so much bigger. Add to that the greater wealth disp…

> In short, the US has to tax more because its government is so much bigger.

It seems reasonable to point out that there’s another direction we could go to solve that imbalance. (Could be across the board or in certain categories.)

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#156

Post by [deleted] »

sokoloff wrote: post #154
PaulAJ wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also the self-employed in the USA have to pay over the odds for rubbish schemes. Large employers can be assumed to employ mostly healthy people, but an individual is more likely to want health insurance if they already know they are a bad risk. This "moral hazard" means that selling health insurance to the self-employed is a money-losing proposition unless you screw them at every opportunity.

I’m no fan of health insurance as currently instantiated, but I don’t see it as screwing them at every opportunity if they are actuarially unprofitable otherwise.

[deleted]

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#157

Post by AmericanChopper »

fastball wrote: post #150
c3534l wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My guess is its one of those style over substance articles, like something by David Sedaris. Not really something we're used to on hackernews where we expect the author to argue X is bad, or we need more Y. The point is entertainment or poetry. Maybe I'm wrong and the author wants to achieve some rhetorical goal, but I think its just a blog post for the sake of it.

Do you personally find it compelling in a stylistic sense? If I was going to judge the quality of this writing, I don't think I could rate it much higher than "mediocre". Obviously this is my own opinion, but I don't find this compelling in terms of style or substance. Honestly it comes across as more of a rant.

I gave up after getting about half way through and realizing it was just making the same vague references over and over without getting to any sort of point.

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#158

Post by Retric »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #44
code_duck wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone else with serious medical problems which have been paid for by public health systems, the financial difficulties of which are compounded by losing your ability to pay once ill, thanks! I would note though, for the purposes of fairness, it's a small percentage of your taxes that go to paying for such programs versus things like the military and interest on debt.

US government healthcare spend is huge, it is not tiny compared to military. $1.1T according to this source in fiscal year 2018: https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-much-does-... This website states in 2018, the federal government spent $582B on Medicare, and $389B on Medicaid, plus all the tax exemption for employer sponsored health insurance and ACA subsidies to individual buyers, etc. https://www.the…

That 630B ish is figure is more spin than reality. Excluding say the coast guard is reasonable if you’re talking offensive military capacity but “Defense” should reasonably include CIA, NSA, border security, and anti terrorism expenditures etc. Further, related pensions and VA benefits are clearly part of the overall defense budget.

Exact interest on past military spending is arguable, but those bills still need to be paid.

PS: US healthcare expenditures is similarly a complex topic. Do you include the heath insurance costs of government contractors etc?

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#159

Post by dgoldstein0 »

perl4ever wrote: post #106
sandworm101 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are making international comparisons, I would add the cost of health insurance in california as a "tax". That's the only way to reasonably compare western countries. I had a friend try to adopt a baby from china many years ago (1990s). He was rejected. The Chinese thought he didn't earn enough to safely raise a kid. They were using a means test designed for US applicants. My friend lobbied to explain all the th…

I don't follow how this could be possible. I'd think most people in the US either would be getting health insurance from the government (Medicare, Medicaid), from an "Obamacare" exchange and subsidized, or from an employer where they don't pay cash. So where would the discrepancy in accounting between that and Canada come from? It seems unlikely that the Chinese government would assume that even Americans buy health…

Most companies don't pay for 100% of health care coverage - and even if they do, that might only be for you, and not for your dependents. The main leverage of private company health insurance is their negotiating power, but it can still be something in the ballpark of $10k/year/person I don't know exact numbers, but definitely Not Cheap.

Re: No One Goes There Anymore

#160

Post by [deleted] »

knorker wrote: post #137

I don't understand people who have serious hereditary medical conditions and have children. Yes, I know that "I just don't get it". Though I do have friends for whom serious illness in the family is the reason they don't have biological children. I do find it a bit selfish to reject adopting a child (and thus presumably making that child's life better), instead of essentially saying "no, I only care about my own gene…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN