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

California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

taxfoundation.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 363 posts

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#141

Post by Drunk_Engineer »

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.

In theory, single payer should offer more choices. With private insurance, you are stuck with certain doctors and hospitals, and can only change plans at years-end.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#142

Post by onphonenow »

Maxion wrote: post #34
mdavis6890 wrote: post #15

I do not believe single-payer is a good idea, but then lots of people DO seem to think it is, and the state is probably the best level at which to conduct an experiment this way. As a Californian, I'll be happy to see the experiment conducted, sad that it happens in my state, and excited to be a guinea pig. My only hope if we do this is that the federal govt or other states do not leap quickly into this and give it a…

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

I suppose you are joking.

NHS in the UK has 6M folks on waiting lists for things like cataract surgery, knee replacements etc. The wait time is in range of 18 weeks for many and for 300K+ > 52 weeks.

Private providers in the US will see you MUCH more quickly than one year (!!).

Some place like Europe are not really single systems. They do work well though in a lot of ways.

They will have statutory mandated and the private coverage. Even the mandated coverage will be delivered by 100-200 nonprofit funds. "Government has virtually no role in the direct delivery of health care."

So these systems work by a) requiring that everyone be covered and b) staying out of the way of the actual service. Interestingly in germany patient representatives have no vote on the main body handling this (insurance companies and physicians do).

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#143

Post by sam0x17 »

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.

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

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#145

Post by onphonenow »

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.

Except UK is a disaster, 6M people waiting for service. Some longer than a year. Heartbreaking stories if you are paying attention.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#146

Post by sam0x17 »

after_care wrote: post #13
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…

It’s very hard to do the math here. It’s largely invisible to me how much my employer is paying in health insurance premiums and it’s unknown that they will add that sum to my salary.

At most startups it's about $1.3k for self + one.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#147

Post by aaomidi »

cal5k wrote: post #125
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?

If you want an extreme example of how bad a single payer system can get, look at Canada. Not only do we have a single-payer system, we've actually banned private pay of any kind for "medically necessary" services. The net effect is predictable - Canada consistently ranks very poorly in international health system comparisons. We have far fewer ICU beds, doctors, imaging machines, etc. per capita than peer nations, an…

> Y'all actually have one of the best systems in the world,

Germany has more ICU beds than the US.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#148

Post by standardUser »

A few things to keep in mind/think about...

- Employer-sponsored healthcare is aggressively anti-entrepreneurial and any universal program would be a massive boon to independent workers and those who own or want to start their own business.

- In addition to the $400-$600 us and/or our employer pay every month (for one person), we also have to pay for copays, coinsurance, deductibles and so on. I'd hope that under any universal system these would all disappear. And no more HSAs and other unnecessarily complicated programs we've designed to deal with our bizarre system.

- CA already has a variety of healthcare systems that are universal for those who qualify and are very expensive. I'm curious how these might operate under a statewide universal system, especially fully federal programs like the VA.

- More than anything, I'd love to leave behind our byzantine and unpredictable system of trying to determine which providers accept our insurance (goodbye "networks") and how much a given treatment will actually cost us. Even as a person who does not often need medical care, I've still encountered many unexpected bills, in some cases despite direct assurances from the provider and/or insurer that I would not have to pay. Then comes the appeals... another absurd aspect of out system we could leave in the dustbin of history.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#149

Post by hourislate »

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…

Typical the argument is that a single payer system is to avoid waste. California Government would be the perfect candidate for this since they are so fiscally responsible and do such an amazing job managing their finances. God Speed.

Re: California Considers Doubling Its Taxes

#150

Post by scollet »

john_moscow wrote: post #59
qaq wrote: post #7

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…

People inherently produce value though. You're going to have to get pretty specific because I can't imagine those people leaving are taking anything vital away from those who stayed.
Post reply on HN