California Considers Doubling Its Taxes • Hacker News Board

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#201

Post by jjav » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:17 PM UTC

lax4ever wrote: post #11

no_wizard wrote: post #4

> 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…

Do you actually pay that much a year in insurance premiums? I don't live in CA, but I sure don't and my health coverage is pretty good. Keep in mind, this is also just the insurance premium, there's no talk of what co-pays or deductibles would be. In addition, your employer now has to pay more based on their gross receipts and if you make more than 150k a year you are paying even more.

$2500/month here (silicon valley) for blue shield PPO (company pays a small part of that, I pay directly most of it). So that's 30K/year just in the premiums plus of course a lot out of pocket since insurance fights against paying for so many services.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#202

Post by pintxo » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #175

aaomidi wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Y'all actually have one of the best systems in the world, Germany has more ICU beds than the US.

> Germany has more ICU beds than the US. That would be shocking if true, which it does not appear to be. Germany has around 32K ICU beds. US has around 96K ICU beds. Germany has slightly more per-capita than the US. (387 vs 294 per million inhabitants) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_hospital_...

your "slightly" is a 30% difference ...

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#203

Post by ryan93 » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:18 PM UTC

baq wrote: post #89

Maxion wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you believe single-payer is a bad idea? The model works very well in most European countries.

not sure why you're getting downvoted, came here to say exactly that. European countries (including the UK - actually one of the best examples of single payer health care) figured out that having a healthy population is a matter of national security, so it gets funded the same way.

Is the implicit claim that we would lose to the UK in a war?

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#204

Post by ARandumGuy » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:20 PM UTC

likeabbas wrote: post #180

ARandumGuy wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While the US does contain some stellar hospitals and surgeons, by broader metrics the US performs poorly. From 2010 to 2015 (before COVID messed with the data), the US ranked 43rd [1] in overall life expectancy. This is behind countries like Cuba and Slovenia, and well behind other rich countries like Japan, Canada, or the UK. Healthcare costs and outcomes can't be separated from each other. The more expensive it is…

Right but if you only consider those that are covered by health insurance then overall health quality is top notch. In the US system you have the luxury of choosing your providers and having your insurance cover things (like elective surgeries) that wouldn't be covered by single payer systems. For example, I had a knee surgery for a partial patellar tendon tear last year that cost me <$500 out of pocket (insurance wa…

And I'm sure Kim Jong-un gets fantastic healthcare, but that doesn't change the fact that North Korea is ranked #124 in life expectancy.

I'm happy the American healthcare system worked well for you. And I'm sure there's plenty of people in Canada who've had terrible experiences with their healthcare system. But that doesn't change the fact that the average Canadian has better health outcomes then the average American.

The American healthcare system fails to support many people most needing help. The fact that the richest country on the planet doesn't provide adequate healthcare to everyone is an embarrassment. Something needs to change, and I refuse to believe that we can't (or shouldn't) provide world class healthcare to every American.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#205

Post by conanbatt » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:22 PM UTC

no_wizard wrote: post #4

> 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…

Unless it sucks, and then you just pay it twice.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#206

Post by jjav » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:23 PM UTC

cobrabyte wrote: post #84

ren_engineer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

when has California's government recently shown any capability to successfully implement big projects or spend tax payer money efficiently? How is the high speed train project coming along?

This is my thought, as well. When your private insurance company stinks, you find a new insurer. When you're forced to pay the government for health insurance, you're stuck without options. Health insurance isn't one of the services that I trust the government to be able to run well. They don't have a particularly great track record where efficiency, customer service, and speed are concerned.

> This is my thought, as well. When your private insurance company stinks, you find a new insurer.

You can't, because the health insurance is provided by your employes so you get whatever they give you.

My health insurance (blue shield) is absolutely terrible (right now I need some medicine they refuse to let me have because it cuts into their profit margins) but there's nothing I can do about it.

And that's after paying $2500/month for the privilege.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#207

Post by wbsss4412 » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:23 PM UTC

thrill wrote: post #188

hotpotamus wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many millions are waiting in the US because they can't afford care?

The solution to a problem that is not working as well as you'd like is not to jump into a system that's working even worse.

Do you have any proof of that? (That it is worse)

Do you have any knowledge of what the typical waiting periods are in the US? How many are postponing care due to inability to cover the costs?

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#208

Post by c0nducktr » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:24 PM UTC

thrill wrote: post #188

hotpotamus wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many millions are waiting in the US because they can't afford care?

The solution to a problem that is not working as well as you'd like is not to jump into a system that's working even worse.

Exactly what I'd say to anyone from the UK thinking of moving to an USA-style healthcare system.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#209

Post by mahirsaid » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:25 PM UTC

sam0x17 wrote: post #143

lax4ever wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you actually pay that much a year in insurance premiums? I don't live in CA, but I sure don't and my health coverage is pretty good. Keep in mind, this is also just the insurance premium, there's no talk of what co-pays or deductibles would be. In addition, your employer now has to pay more based on their gross receipts and if you make more than 150k a year you are paying even more.

I pay $1.3k/month for myself + husband in MD, both early 30s.

OMG!

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#210

Post by Justin_K » Fri, Jan 07, 2022, 9:26 PM UTC

no_wizard wrote: post #4

> 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…

Except anybody you consider to be a "good" doctor won't take this insurance because the payouts are too low. So, your employer will still buy "aftermarket" plans to provide better care. Now you'll be paying both for a plan you won't use and a plan you will use.