111–120 of 146 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Clearly something is missing. Either he's lying, or Medicare won't fully cover some if his expected costs.
It's also the quality and availability of care. I have a friend on Medicaid and finding a hospital that will accept his plan, and can give him an appointment in any kind of reasonable timeframe is exceptionally difficult.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The father of universal healthcare by way of a state supported insurance system was Bismarck, who was far right by modern standards, and argued for it based on Christian morality, not socialism, though he was "accused" of being a "state socialist" over it, and embraced that label because it fit well with his struggle to limit the growing appeal of the actual socialists. In European history, a lot of welfare reforms s…
Bismarck was afraid of workers unionizing and transformed a working healthcare system owned by workers into a state owned one. That move significantly reduced the utility of worker unions, which was the goal behind it.
I do agree with you that a lot of his motivation was to counter the socialists and unions though.
Though I'll note that already before Bismarck, the socialists largely didn't oppose state involvement - Marx famously lambasted the Gotha program of what became the SPD in part for their willingness to trust the state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their aside is also false though. Look at my comment below the OP.
> Their aside is also false though. You are drawing a conclusion that was not proven by your comment. OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates. Both of you could be correct: OP could be correct that many income-constrained folks delay treatment until they age into qualifying for Medicare, and you could be correct that on the whole, f…
Yes, and you can make a straightforward logical deduction from survival rates to delaying diagnosis which I left out, but detail it below:
1. From Data: Assume equal or worse cancer rates in the US and similar levels of cures across US and Europe (cancer rates are indeed worse in the US and Europe does have good cancer treatment on par with US)
2. OP claimed: People delay diagnosis in the US
2a. From data/science: Delayed diagnosis => Higher death rate
3. Deduction from 1 and 2, and 2a.: Higher death rate in the US
4. Data: Lower death rate in the US
5. Contradiction: 3 and 4
6. Reductio: We have a contradiction. We have to negate one of our assumptions or more. We can't throw away data, so we can only throw away OP's claim (2).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about maximum out of pocket maximums? All expenses are capped at like $15k per year right?
> capped at like $15k per year right? That’s a lot of money for most retirees.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Their aside is also false though. You are drawing a conclusion that was not proven by your comment. OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates. Both of you could be correct: OP could be correct that many income-constrained folks delay treatment until they age into qualifying for Medicare, and you could be correct that on the whole, f…
> OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates. Yes, and you can make a straightforward logical deduction from survival rates to delaying diagnosis which I left out, but detail it below: 1. From Data: Assume equal or worse cancer rates in the US and similar levels of cures across US and Europe (cancer rates are indeed worse in the US and…
> I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that.
We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individual meeting their personal healthcare costs, so your point is off-topic, not OP’s.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> capped at like $15k per year right? That’s a lot of money for most retirees.
It’s not that much money considering the crazy amount of hospital time and advanced treatments administered. That’s 25% of the average annual salary in the United States and you should be able to pay that for once in a lifetime treatments.
Around a third of Americans have less than $1000.
https://www.forbes.com/advisor/banking/savings/average-ameri...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates. Yes, and you can make a straightforward logical deduction from survival rates to delaying diagnosis which I left out, but detail it below: 1. From Data: Assume equal or worse cancer rates in the US and similar levels of cures across US and Europe (cancer rates are indeed worse in the US and…
Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines. > I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that. We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individu…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines. > I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that. We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individu…
Both of you are hashing something out that 'dang has already called out as off-topic across the thread.
I don’t work here, and neither do you, so let’s both agree to disagree on it being on-topic or not, as it’s not my place to speak for dang or the other mods, and it’s not yours either, for that matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was claimed they committed copyright infringement and they admit to photographing his works as part of this discovery. It actually being copyright infringement is questionable, but if so it would be improper behavior.
NAL but in copyright it’s not making a copy that’s problematic, it’s making that copy available to others . Anyone can take a picture of Mickey Mouse; one only has a problem when they start to sell it. This cryptography solution is more akin to mathematics. And mathematics isn’t covered by the copyright law.
Criminal investigation and penalties occur with wide scale commercial distribution of copyrighted works.
They copped the actual message in its entirety not just a cryptographic formula. Further, his hand written notes may have creative expression even if the process itself isn’t protected by copyright. Similar to how software code is protected.