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

NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

nysenate.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 569 posts

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#341

Post by winstonewert »

strombofulous wrote: post #196
Manuel_D wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is, the apartment owner pays property tax and collect rent from tenants to pay for that. If property taxes go up, property owners raise rents to compensate. So the tenants are paying the property tax, albeit indirectly.

If the tenants will pay and it doesn't break any rules, why not raise rent before taxes go up and pocket the extra? (serious question)

If one landlord raises the rent, this will tend to make renters go to other landlords who are not raising the rent. But if the taxes are increased on all the landlords, they will likely all raise their rents together and renters can't simply go to another landlord who isn't raising the rent to avoid the increase.

Its actually much more complicated then that, depending on factors such as the propensity of landlords to cease renting out units if their profit decreases, the propensity of renters to shift to smaller dwellings in the face of rent increases, etc.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#342

Post by [deleted] »

majormajor wrote: post #240
goatcode wrote: post #46

Coming from a country that has this, there should be caution: it gets more affordable, but you get what you pay for. In my country of origin, you get a partially-paid-for ride to the emergency room, where you pay for things like casts, non-ward rooms, dental care out of pocket. There is no prescription coverage. There is no optometry coverage. I would wait significant chunks of a year for procedures and diagnostics.…

The US spends more per capita than other countries on healthcare. But that doesn't mean the US would have to pay less per capita in a single-payer system. So we could keep getting what we pay for in terms of capacity, etc, if we want. You would expect a wealthy country to be able to pay a premium to get a premium.

[deleted]

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#343

Post by erosenbe0 »

kmonsen wrote: post #282
Beltiras wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Iceland. ETR is about 40% for me but I'm in a high tax bracket. None of the Scandinavian countries even have 60% marginal tax rate. EDIT: My MTR is ~42% so my ETR can't be 40%. I don't have a payslip to calculate and searching the interwebs isn't helping a lot right now.

Same in Norway, max marginal rate caps out at almost 50%: https://www.skatteetaten.no/en/rates/maximum-effective-margi...

In a high-tax US state like California the top marginal income tax is about 47%. This covers no health care unless you are over 65, disabled, or are below the medicaid threshold, which is low.

There is also a lower rate om capital gains such as stock or real estate, sales (like a VAT), gas tax, vehicle tax, utility tax, phone tax, cable internet tax, etc.

Plus, of course, employers are paying some extra payroll taxes per employee.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#344

Post by RHSeeger »

yazaddaruvala wrote: post #232
ceeplusplus wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read through the bill and there are no specifics written on how the entire thing is supposed to be funded, other than saying that payroll taxes will be increased to fund it. My guess is that once the numbers come out on how much tax would have to be paid that this bill would be dead.

Companies currently provide health insurance and pay per employee. Per employee costs go up due to health care payroll taxes. Per employee costs come down due to not paying for health insurance. Overall, net-neutral cost to companies and simplifies health care payments for hospitals, clinics, etc so fewer employees to explain and collect payments so cost of care comes down. Seems like a win - win - win.

If you follow this specific thread, the discussion looks like this

>>>> Person complaining about how his previous state-run health care system was awful

>>> Person replying that your current plan will still be there, no one will force you to take the state run plan

>> Person commenting on how funding for the bill will kill it

> Response that funding will come from the money that companies were paying on health plans.

So if everything in this one thread is true, then

- Companies will continue to offer the health plan they currently offer

- The state will provide a single payer health plan

- The money that companies currently pay on health plans will pay for both of those, with no increase in cost to the employee

Clearly that's not realistic.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#345

Post by bradleyjg »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #173
hersko wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in NY and pay >$18k a year in property tax for a small house. Real estate taxes are high enough.

They are offensively low for multi-million dollar buildings in NYC. Cut some slack for owner occupiers who had the assessed value skyrocket on them. Tax everybody else fairly.

A part of the reason is idiotic programs like 421a

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#346

Post by monocasa »

chrisseaton wrote: post #338
monocasa wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have a yearly physical with your GP under NHS? Also, I just spent a total of seven hours last week making calls just to get insurance to even process my prescription that they had previously approved.

There's no way in hell an NHS GP would agree to see me just for a physical without some very specific major problem actually in evidence. If you never want to see your GP again then yeah petition for the UK system.

What does a "check up" mean?

There's no way my insurance would pay for random "I don't think anything's wrong but I want to look for something anyway" outside of yearly physicals either.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#347

Post by Spooky23 »

hervature wrote: post #194
beebmam wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's 60% marginal rates. Last year I paid 17% of my total income in taxes.

I don't want to be rude, but if you paid 17%, that's basically the minimum income tax rate (10+4+3) for NYC. That's pretty far form the OP's "NYC high earners". Of course, if you got credits, that's orthogonal as normally those credits cost more than they are worth. For instance, the child credit is far from the cast of raising a child.

If you own your home and are married the rate comes down until you make >500.

I live in NY, not NYC and pay ~18%, or ~22% with property tax.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#348

Post by jmyeet »

Cue the Republican challenge arguing the state has exceeded its authority and this is a Federal issue (just like how Ajit Pai removed net neutrality saying it wasn't a Federal issue but then turned around and challenged California's net neutrality as being within the FCC's authority).

As for the NY bill, I'll be interested to see what this looks like. There are many variations on single-payer. For example, the NHS in the UK has many medical professionals (including primary care physicians) as government employees. In Australia, Medicare works by government rebate.

The other aspect will be how this will impact coverage out-of-state, employment coverage and employment insurance premiums.

You see many reactionaries argue "but it will raise taxes!". Welll... yes and no. You're already paying for your employer health insurance. This just shifts that cost to the government (sort of) but now health insurance isn't tied to employment.

Re: NY Senate Bill S5474 proposing a universal single payer health plan for NYers

#349

Post by chrisseaton »

monocasa wrote: post #346
chrisseaton wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no way in hell an NHS GP would agree to see me just for a physical without some very specific major problem actually in evidence. If you never want to see your GP again then yeah petition for the UK system.

What does a "check up" mean? There's no way my insurance would pay for random "I don't think anything's wrong but I want to look for something anyway" outside of yearly physicals either.

> outside of yearly physicals

Yearly physical == check up. Same thing. Going to the doctor once a year for a general check that you aren't developing any issues that you weren't aware of yet and to monitor your health.

I don't have either. I haven't seen a doctor for about five years I think, under the NHS system.

If I phoned my NHS GP and said 'it's been a year I'd like you to generally check my physical health' they'd tell me to fuck off.

Post reply on HN