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

US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

peoplespolicyproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 534 posts

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#241

Post by danans »

ben_w wrote: post #66
zrail wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$300 is a steal.

$300 [1] is more than I’ve spent on (non-dental) helthcare, in total, over my entire life. That includes one count of general anaesthetic and emergency surgery because of testicular torsion which happened while I wasn’t registered with any local doctor, one burned arm, one being knocked unconscious by a trampoline, and one being hit by a car. [1] “after premiums” is roughly the same as “after taxes”, right?

You probably don't live in the US, right?

In the US, I've already payed thousands in after-premium medical expenses for my very healthy young children, just in copays and ER visit fees for normal accidents that kids get into, and that after having what in the US is considered amazing health insurance, so I'm a very lucky person.

I had to go to the ER in the UK as a tourist recently. They refused to take payment since I wasn't admitted to the hospital.

> [1] “after premiums” is roughly the same as “after taxes”, right?

For the purposes of comparison between the US and other OECD countries, yes.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#242

Post by OrgNet »

Someone1234 wrote: post #19

I moved to the US from a country with socialised medicine. When you include premiums then taxes in both were roughly similar if not a little higher in the US (ignoring cost of living differences). But even that doesn't include the real sting on the tail of US medicine. You pay a fairly high health insurance premium, but if you actually need health services you then pay again through the nose even with insurance "disc…

You should go to a his doctor's walk-in clinic instead (it cost $100 here). But yeah I completely agree.. it is a lot cheaper if you don't have money and are not insured (they cut you a huge break).

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#244

Post by shuckles »

ajross wrote: post #31
munk-a wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or really any public pension. I feel like if you're <40 then you should be planning for Social Security to not exist when you get old, anything else seems overly optimistic.

There's literally no analysis that shows social security completely failing at any point. That's spin you're getting from partisan media, and it's absolutely infuriating the people allow this to persist. In a few years, given no changes, the cash flow will go negative and we'll begin spending down the trust fund. By 2035 or so (I forget the numbers, and the projections tend to vary widely anyway because of differing…

The trust fund is an accounting fiction that doesn't hold any economically productive assets. Congress spent social security's surplus in the general budget and issued special obligation bonds in return that accumulate "interest" on paper but do not ever collect from the government. They cannot be sold on the market. Taxes or debt needs to be raised or benefits need to be cut effectively now.

This is from a 1999 OMB report:

``These [trust fund] balances are available to finance future benefit payments and other trust fund expenditures–but only in a bookkeeping sense. These funds are not set up to be pension funds, like the funds of private pension plans. They do not consist of real economic assets that can be drawn down in the future to fund benefits. Instead, they are claims on the Treasury, that, when redeemed, will have to be financed by raising taxes, borrowing from the public, or reducing benefits or other expenditures.``

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#245

Post by [deleted] »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #114
wirrbel wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a basic visit. I attended a first-aid training for new parents here in my home country and the general advice was to seek help if in doubt, at night times by calling an ambulance or visiting, well, the emergency room. In two years we were there with our baby two times. Not charged a penny. During this time, I went once, my wife went once. In all instances we were reassured that it was appropriate to visit the h…

Interestingly, in the UK they had a large "this is not an emergency" campaign trying to make people to choose GPs over emergency services.

[deleted]

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#246

Post by gwright »

kelnos wrote: post #135
pochamago wrote: post #105

"If you include things that aren't taxes, people are taxed a lot more"

If you don't do something , comparing tax rates between countries is meaningless when you get different things for those tax dollars. I think the developed world (minus us here in the US, of course) has finally realized that access to health care is a basic human right and should be included.

The primary reason that some people push back against this notion of health care as a "basic human right" is that it is an example of a "right" that can only be provided by force. And by force I mean that the only way it can be "guaranteed" by the government is for the government to forcibly collect taxes to pay for the services. Forceable redistribution is required. Perhaps even forcible job assignments (nurses, doctors, technicians, etc) if you really want to make sure the right is provided equally to everyone (ratio of patients to doctors, etc.).

In contrast rights such as freedom of speech, assembly, press, religion and so on can be guaranteed through inaction of the government. Nothing needs to be taken away from anyone to guarantee these rights. Basically this is the difference between positive rights and negative rights.

One large problem with bucketing positive and negative rights together as "basic rights" and insisting that the government must guarantee these basic rights is that it becomes difficult to identify a limiting principle. If health care is a "basic right", then why isn't "food" or "shelter" or "clothing"? How would we go about guaranteeing those things?

Please don't interpret my comments as suggesting that reasonably priced health insurance and accessible health care services aren't important. They are, but there are ways of structuring those services and socializing some of the costs that don't require that they be considered "basic rights".

It is interesting that you qualify your claim that health care is a "basic human right" to the "developed world". Does that mean that it is not a "basic human right" in other parts of the world? Why not? If it is a basic human right, shouldn't it be protected universally? And if you think it should be provided universally who should be responsible for providing that right outside the developed world? And if it there is some complex economic conditions that are pre-requisites then is it really a "basic human right"?

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#247

Post by riku_iki »

awakeasleep wrote: post #159
ngngngng wrote: post #28

The US healthcare system is making many people extremely rich. Someone has to pay for that.

Think of what it'd do to the insurance worker economy if we switched to a medicare for all system! It's pretty fucked up that such a large chunk of our country is now essentially parasitic. (I say this while recognizing that runaway medical costs aren't solely the result of insurers)

Curious if there can be Amazon for healthcare..

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#248

Post by seppin »

pxeboot wrote: post #7
adamnemecek wrote: post #2

Not just that, they are also getting nothing in return. The US voters need to realize just how much are they getting fucked over by the military-industrial complex. I’m not against taxes, I’m against taxes that go to pay for wars as opposed to medical insurance, infrastructure and education.

Unfortunately all that waste creates millions of jobs. If military and healthcare costs were brought under control too quickly, it would literally destroy the economy.

Military yes, that's millions of jobs for people that would struggle to be employed otherwise.

The health insurance industry, however, needs to die. The sooner the better. The resulting boom in people actually receiving healthcare in the US will cover the job losses over time.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#249

Post by maxxxxx »

ishjoh wrote: post #200
maxxxxx wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

" Social Security to not exist when you get old," that's totally self defeating. There are simple adjustments that can be done to make it viable long term. But there are quite few people in DC who desperately want it to fail to show that government is no good.

Social Security is so popular that either party trying to cut benefits will be voted out at the next election, especially if the other party runs on restoring it. So instead of cutting benefits to those currently receiving it, instead there will be a call to increase the retirement age. This is already happening in Denmark where the retirement age will be 67 by 2022 and after 2030 could be increased 1 year every 5 ye…

Raising the retirement age is probably the only way to keep things going. People used to retire in their 60s and died in their 70s. Now they live up to 90 and more. Simple math tells us that this is not sustainable.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#250

Post by maxxxxx »

jedberg wrote: post #172
vonmoltke wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In the US you can happy if your cost for seeing a doctor is less than 4 digits. My wife and I have never paid four figures for a doctor visit, despite having two surgeries (one oral), a calf strain, and a dislocated shoulder (with ER visit) between us. The state of medical care in the US is bad enough as it is; you don't need to make up hyperbolic bullshit to make it seem worse.

Wait until you need dental surgery. I've never found a dental insurance that allows paying out more than $1,500/year. One gum graft alone is about $2,000. Dentures, replacement teeth, these all cost multiple thousands of dollars.

True. One thing I have noticed about dental though is that they give reasonable upfront estimates which is something most other doctors don’t do.
Post reply on HN