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

441–450 of 534 posts

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#441

Post by hourislate »

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…

I moved from Canada and while I lived there I didn't have two nickles to rub together. Payroll taxes, sales taxes, fee's, cost of living and under employment robbed me of a decent life. The medical system was hurry up and wait while you die. Anything in between full blown Cancer and a cold was a situation where you would wait or fall between the cracks(9 months it took me to see a Neurologist, 3 months for a shoulder expert).

After moving to the US I have earned more money in 10 years then I could have earned in my entire life in Canada. My medical is outstanding and my taxes in TX are a pittance.

It seems where you live in the US might make a difference.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#442

Post by [deleted] »

philjohn wrote: post #405

So - in the UK you pay national insurance, which ostensibly pays for the NHS and retirement benefits. If you earn £150k a year (top 2% of salaries in the UK) you pay £6,964.16 a year. That's an astounding deal. There are no deductibles, no co pays for hospital stays, GP visits are free, as are any tests and investigations. You do pay £9 for each item on a prescription, but if you get more than 3 items a month you can…

[deleted]

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#443

Post by shados »

scj wrote: post #73
shados wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Someone else beat me to it, but being Canadian who moved to the US, I can kind of see where some people are coming from. If you're young healthy, have a good job and are a bit short sighted, you're way better off in the US (with little to no insurance or a crappy high deductible plan) in term of take home pay. Even if you're not healthy, if you have a lot of money, you're also way better off since wait times in afflu…

Be careful when telling anecdotes, the implementation of health care is a provincial matter. I can see my family doctor within zero to two days, assuming I don't use the practice's walk-in clinic first.

Fair point. That is from good old Quebec, and friends from Ontario do tell me it's better over there. My anecdotes do match with numbers and stats I've seen at the time (but it's been a while since I've lived up north).

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#444

Post by distances »

sparkling wrote: post #419
mamon wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that unrestricted immigration has the opposite effect: rich countries taking advantage of poor ones, via “brain drain”. That’s why the average age of medicine doctors in Poland seems to be around 50: all the younger ones went to Germany or Scandinavia. It’s true for blue collar workers as well: try hiring a contractor to remodel your house and then watch them leave the job unfinished because they…

Both is true. There is brain drain as well as welfare migration. My hometown in Germany with a population of ~300k now has ~11k migrants from Romania und Bulgaria. Aside from various social problems this is also a big strain on the social systems. 85%+ of households are dependent on child support checks.

There's also the fact that Western European countries desperately need immigration for covering future pensions. Countries like Germany and Finland are the next to follow Japan's crippling issues with aging population and poor dependency ratio.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#445

Post by SolaceQuantum »

AlexTWithBeard wrote: post #124
rhacker wrote: post #87

Like to bring this up when we talk taxes: I think it's totally crazy that we give the feds 25% or more and our states soo soo sooooo much less. I think it should be the other way around: 5% for the feds, and maybe 20% to the states. The reason is that our cities are filled with bums, and have absolutely no money to either give them jobs or make new programs. The feds don't give a shit and are busy making missiles or…

our cities are filled with bums, and have absolutely no money to either give them jobs or make new programs. New York City spends about $30k per homeless and you still cannot walk a block without seeing one. It's not about the money...

IIRC New York City actually has higher rates of housing/sheltering homeless than most other cities in the USA. However, due to population size + density it would still be possible to see the homeless people who refuse/cannot access housing fairly regularly if one lives in or commutes to the densest areas. (For example, I've only ever seen homeless people in the heart of manhattan. I commute to Astoria and Flushing and long island fairly often and hardly ever/never see homeless people there.)

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#446

Post by lost_my_pwd »

jccalhoun wrote: post #435
TallGuyShort wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't even find out what stuff costs beforehand either. I had to get a blood test. I had gotten burned before where my insurance said they covered a physical, but it turns out their definition of a physical didn't include the doctor's definition, which included blood tests. So before I had my blood drawn, I asked them to tell me what the tests would cost if my insurance didn't cover it. "It depends on how it's coded,…

The billing for health care in the USA is also rediculous. Last week I got a bill from the doctor's office for a visit back in November that my insurance company decided not to pay. What other business takes 4+months to send a bill?

Oh it can get even more ridiculous... yesterday I got yet another $300 bill for an ER visit from October 2017. Now I have figure out whether it will cost me more in lost billable hours than to just pay this bill, knowing that contacting my $1700/mo insurance company to help sort things out will prove to be fruitless.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#447

Post by mywittyname »

jccalhoun wrote: post #435
TallGuyShort wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't even find out what stuff costs beforehand either. I had to get a blood test. I had gotten burned before where my insurance said they covered a physical, but it turns out their definition of a physical didn't include the doctor's definition, which included blood tests. So before I had my blood drawn, I asked them to tell me what the tests would cost if my insurance didn't cover it. "It depends on how it's coded,…

The billing for health care in the USA is also rediculous. Last week I got a bill from the doctor's office for a visit back in November that my insurance company decided not to pay. What other business takes 4+months to send a bill?

My partner works for a large hospital network dealing with insurance payments. Their department is not even able to figure out how much bills "should be," which prevents them from being able to prioritize their work based on total costs.

When the process is voodoo for the people who actually deal with insurance payments, normal people stand zero chance because it's unlikely you'll ever find a person to talk to who can find this information out.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#448

Post by dsfyu404ed »

MertsA wrote: post #303
jdmichal wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You walked away from multiple ER visits including surgeries for less than four digits out of pocket? Maybe consider that your experience is the exceptional, not the people you call hyperbolic. My son had a laceration glued together (dermabond in lieu of one or two stitches) and that was either close to or slightly over four digits after totaling the hospital bill and doctor bill, both in network.

My son just had a laceration that needed closed up a week ago. We didn't even take him to the ER, just his pediatrician who saw him for all of 5 minutes. She didn't even use any skin adhesives to close up the wound, she just taped it together and called it good. $120 for literally putting on a bandaid that came apart before we even finished the car ride home leaving us to tape it up properly ourselves.

You didn't pay $120 for the doctor to slap on a band-aid. You paid $120 for the peace of mind of having a "trained professional" do it and tell you that was an acceptable solution. It's the same reason people call plumbers to snake drains and pay mechanics to change brakes. Those are basic things that the least trained workers in those industries are capable of doing but you pay a premium to not have to think about it.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#449

Post by abstractbarista »

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 don't go to ER for a high fever.

Re: US Workers Are Highly Taxed If You Count Premiums

#450

Post by SantalBlush »

tathougies wrote: post #358
SantalBlush wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And many non-American countries have suffered from American hegemony. The US used concentration camps in the Phillipines and overthrew the Honduran government so we could have cheap fruit. Are you absolutely sure that the US provides a net benefit to other countries via its military?

> Are you absolutely sure that the US provides a net benefit to other countries via its military? Yes, the issue at hand isn't whether the US provides a net benefit to every country, because 'every country' is rarely used as a metric against which to measure the US. Instead, America is typically measured against western European countries and 'developed' countries (so, ex-colonies, essentially). The article in questi…

There is a big difference between these statements:

>Individual US tax payers pay for most of the world's security.

>Pretty much every 'developed' country benefits from US hegemony.

The former is outright wrong. I'm not convinced the latter is correct either, but at least we're getting closer.

Post reply on HN