111–120 of 363 posts
The healthcare system in the United States is debatably one of the worst in the world. Cheers to California for trying to find a way to guarantee that all Californian's have access to the worlds worst healthcare system.
The US health care treatments are the best in the world, just the costs are higher than the rest of the world.
> to fund a first-in-the-nation single-payer health-care system. This is key here. So instead of paying this out to a private insurance company I pay it in taxes, there by my actual change is net zero, in most cases. I have a feeling most reactions might be headline driven here. I think it’s worth doing the math on how much it costs you in healthcare coverage before really judging a book by its cover here. If my comp…
I hope Kaiser Permanente lobbies this or we can opt out. I've lived in many states and my exp with Kaiser in California is among the best. I don't see the state (especially bloated California) doing better. (I pay out of pocket via a side business, not from my current employer.)
Maybe it would be a good idea to lean on the better insurance companies (are there more than kaiser?) to administer.
Personally I think there needs to be stronger regulation so that they can still make some profit (not obscene) for incentive to get more efficient, while regulating they can't take that profit at the expense of patients & access to care.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Looking at housing availability hard to believe there is an actual net outflow from CA
There's an outflow of people willing to produce value, and an inflow of people ready to consume it. It will work just great until suddenly there's not that many value left to feed all the hungry mouths. And then the mouths will take pitchforks and go raid the nearby granary because that's where they think the food is. Only to find it empty because the people willing to actually produce food left long time ago. USSR h…
Breathlessly comparing the USSR's economic policies with the raising of taxes to cover such a fundamental service betrays a staggering ignorance of economics and history.
> to fund a first-in-the-nation single-payer health-care system. This is key here. So instead of paying this out to a private insurance company I pay it in taxes, there by my actual change is net zero, in most cases. I have a feeling most reactions might be headline driven here. I think it’s worth doing the math on how much it costs you in healthcare coverage before really judging a book by its cover here. If my comp…
It's designed to be a progressive system, unlike current health insurance, so almost nobody's change will be net zero, even assuming the cost of providing the service is the same (which, who knows). Low-income earners can probably expect to pay considerably less, and high-income earners can expect to pay considerably more; only people right at the crossover point would expect no change.
This is insane. People are already leaving the states in droves. If this passes they are literally shooting themselves in the foot.
I would gladly move to a state with a single-payer healthcare system and I have never considered leaving my state before in my life so it might not be quite as one-sided as you think
It's an adverse selection problem.
People who are most subject to the tax are inclined to leave.
People who benefit the most from the trade are inclined to move in.