Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties • Hacker News Board

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#251

Post by collegeburner » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 3:56 AM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #213

WalterBright wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because it's "free" doesn't mean you aren't paying plenty for it.

Public+private spending on healthcare in the US is 2-3x that of public+private spending on healthcare in the rest of the OECD. See the chart at https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm ; we pay more in taxes than any other OECD nation does total for healthcare, and then pile individual spending on top of that .

and we hear a lot of stories of ppl from other "free healthcare" OECD countries having to come here for decent care. i'd rather a system where i can get better by paying more than a system where i'm at the mercy of some bureaucrat or waiting list.

if you want to reduce costs:

1. stop giving the AMA a monopoly. ban state and local regulations on how much healthcare can be built and where.

2. require posting prices and give it teeth.

3. make it easier to import cheap generics from other countries.

4. enable nurse practitioners to do more stuff.

5. enable more clinics with clear prices for stuff like this one where i can go their site and see it's $6215 for a bilteral knee arthroscopy: https://surgerycenterok.com/?procedure_category=knee#jump because very few of the healthcare $ are spent on emergency procedures where ppl don't have time to choose and information is how you make markets efficient.

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#252

Post by medvezhenok » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 3:57 AM UTC

arcticbull wrote: post #235

jfim wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the down payment delta pretty significant? Having to save 160k instead of 40k for a 20% down payment significantly delays the point at which a millennial household could start accruing home equity, feel confident about starting a family, etc.

Yes, it does mean folks can generally only buy a home later than they would have before - but that's not what we're measuring. We're measuring how well off they are. Over this period, the 1970s to present, equities have way outperformed real estate. So folks rented, and saved in the equity markets instead until they could make their down payments - without diminishing their quality of life. In a very real way, the 's…

There are a lot of other benefits of buying with high interest rates - namely that the U.S. 30-year mortgage allows you to refinance if rates drop. So that 18% headline rate quickly became ~10% or less after refinancing a few years down the road (not to mention paying for houses with depreciating dollars because of the 70s inflation).

You don't get the same optionality if you buy with interest rates at an all time low.

Housing affordability is actually at an all-time low right now, close to 1982 levels, after the interest rate rise.

https://www.atlantafed.org/center-for-housing-and-policy/dat...

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#253

Post by mattkrause » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 3:58 AM UTC

acdha wrote: post #133

ekianjo wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> healthcare per capita than any other OECD nation. You also need to mention that the US is not like any other OECD nation. It also happens to he the nation with the largest innovation in Healthcare, and not just by a little. By Far.

Which is heavily paid for by taxpayer-funded research, so Americans are paying for it on both sides.

Heavily is something of a stretch: the NIH is a fairly small part ($40B) of the federal budget ($1,600B discretionary + another $4,000 mandatory spending).

It's about 0.5% of the total budget, which works out to about a dollar a week for the average taxpayer. On top of that R&D spending has a huge multiplier: a lot of that money supports small, high-tech businesses, which in turn hire people...etc

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#254

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 4:19 AM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #250

ceejayoz wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're skipping off to a different argument. You asserted "Just because it's 'free' doesn't mean you aren't paying plenty for it", but the places where it's "free" are paying less . You're highlighting issues specific to the American system in an apparent attempt to argue against European-style systems, which is... odd.

The US does not have a free market in health care.

Again, an entirely different argument, but what country does that you'd like to emulate? We've tried the "no regulation" thing in our past; it's where the term "snake oil salesman" comes from.

"Free market healthcare" is just the right's version of "communism would work if it weren't for human nature".

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#255

Post by ceejayoz » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 4:20 AM UTC

collegeburner wrote: post #251

ceejayoz wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public+private spending on healthcare in the US is 2-3x that of public+private spending on healthcare in the rest of the OECD. See the chart at https://data.oecd.org/healthres/health-spending.htm ; we pay more in taxes than any other OECD nation does total for healthcare, and then pile individual spending on top of that .

and we hear a lot of stories of ppl from other "free healthcare" OECD countries having to come here for decent care. i'd rather a system where i can get better by paying more than a system where i'm at the mercy of some bureaucrat or waiting list. if you want to reduce costs: 1. stop giving the AMA a monopoly. ban state and local regulations on how much healthcare can be built and where. 2. require posting prices and…

> and we hear a lot of stories of ppl from other "free healthcare" OECD countries having to come here for decent care

You'll hear that in both directions, to the point where the CDC has a page for Americans seeking care abroad, typically due to exorbitant costs here. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/travel/page/medical-tourism

> i'd rather a system where i can get better by paying more than a system where i'm at the mercy of some bureaucrat or waiting list.

There are very few countries in which this is the case; you can opt for private healthcare in Europe, Australia, etc. if you like. There's simply also a specific, reasonable level of care available to all. (The idea that the US lacks bureaucrats and waiting lists is, incidentally, funny to most folks who've tried to see a specialist on short order, or had insurance deny coverage for something.)

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#256

Post by notch656a » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 4:46 AM UTC

slg wrote: post #224

WalterBright wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There is still something very wrong with the healthcare system in the US Government interference with the free market.

Is there a country you would point to as a good model for free market healthcare? Because healthcare seems like a market prone to be abused by market forces because the demand for it is often inelastic. For example, the free market price for insulin is basically infinite because type 1 diabetics need a constant supply of it or else they die. Judging by the price of insulin in the US compared to our peer nations, it s…

>For example, the free market price for insulin is basically infinite because type 1 diabetics need a constant supply of it or else they die.

I've been to places in the Philippines where all available water is either on private property or being sold by private vendors. The price of water did not go to infinity, in fact you could buy a 1L bottle for something like 10 pesos, which is like $0.20. I'm not so sure a free market for necessities results in infinite price. If the price were truly near-infinite the entire economy of workers and capital would flock to it in seek of infinite profits and competition would become fierce.

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#257

Post by merry_flame » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 5:10 AM UTC

ekianjo wrote: post #102

telchior wrote: post #59

One of the items this article doesn't cover is healthcare spending, which has increased between 2 and 8 times since 1980 (depending on whether you're looking at individual spending or share of GDP). Here's a decent collection of charts: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/u-s-spe... It has been shocking to me to see how cheap and effective healthcare can be in other countries, from an emergency visit…

> In the US, healthcare is effectively a collection of cartels Not just in the US. For example there's a huge glasses cartel in France with specialists that are protected by the government and make pairs of glasses cost 500~1000 USD with very little reimbursement, while in Japan private companies (that actually compete against each other's) let you have glasses for 60~70 USD all included. You are literally better off…

Things have improved significantly over the past few decades. Once you have a prescription, you can independently buy your glasses from a discount seller or on the Internet. Most opticians also offer very decent pairs that are fully covered by social security, or that cost €1. The pain point these days is getting that prescription renewed.

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#258

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 5:10 AM UTC

medvezhenok wrote: post #252

arcticbull wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, it does mean folks can generally only buy a home later than they would have before - but that's not what we're measuring. We're measuring how well off they are. Over this period, the 1970s to present, equities have way outperformed real estate. So folks rented, and saved in the equity markets instead until they could make their down payments - without diminishing their quality of life. In a very real way, the 's…

There are a lot of other benefits of buying with high interest rates - namely that the U.S. 30-year mortgage allows you to refinance if rates drop. So that 18% headline rate quickly became ~10% or less after refinancing a few years down the road (not to mention paying for houses with depreciating dollars because of the 70s inflation). You don't get the same optionality if you buy with interest rates at an all time lo…

[deleted]

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#259

Post by MattPalmer1086 » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 5:18 AM UTC

collegeburner wrote: post #247

bawolff wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone disputes that us healthcare is better if you have the money.

then you can understand why those of us with better healthcare and money don't want to take a downgrade to a "universal" system that is better for ppl with no money but worse for others. most middle class ppl in America have decent healthcare as a job benefit so most of us don't want to change. this is why "if you like your doctor you can keep them" was an essential talking point for passing obamacare.

Do you actually like having your health insurance tied to your employment?

To me it would be a huge worry if I lost a job and needed healthcare.

Re: Gen Z have 86% less purchasing power compared to baby boomers in their twenties

#260

Post by collegeburner » Tue, Aug 16, 2022, 5:32 AM UTC

MattPalmer1086 wrote: post #259

collegeburner wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

then you can understand why those of us with better healthcare and money don't want to take a downgrade to a "universal" system that is better for ppl with no money but worse for others. most middle class ppl in America have decent healthcare as a job benefit so most of us don't want to change. this is why "if you like your doctor you can keep them" was an essential talking point for passing obamacare.

Do you actually like having your health insurance tied to your employment? To me it would be a huge worry if I lost a job and needed healthcare.

no. but i would rather good healthcare tied to employment then mediocre healthcare that's not. it doesn't seem like other countries have been able to achieve good healthcare not tied to employment so i think it's better to focus on liberalizing the market.

btw it was the ridiculous wage and price controls that led to employers adding healthcare as a benefit... so doesnt seem like more government gonna fix it.