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

Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

sciencedirect.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 148 posts

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#91

Post by danssig »

abalashov wrote: post #63

It hasn't been for me, but only because I (and other, likeminded people) have chosen to bank on the fact that we're relatively healthy so far--knock on wood--and chosen to forego it. I don't mean that I'm literally uninsured. I mean that I have one of those "catastrophic" high-deductible policies that so many young people are stuck with, so for any kind of routine procedures or office visits or anything barring an im…

If you have catastrophic you may as well be uninsured. Can you take a $10k hit? I'm guessing you can't.

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#92

Post by danssig »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #54
jonknee wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Me too, but it's government run... Seems like your previous statement would preclude you from liking it.

Some governments are good at running some things. The US government seems to screw up everything. I don't know why this is, but if public health care ever becomes reality, and it is anything like the DMV, or any government services in California for that matter, or VA hospitals...may [deity] help us all. I am in no way a fan of the perverse incentives created by a for-profit private health care system, but I am worri…

When's the last time you were in a US hospital? I'd say the nightmare you fear is already here.

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#93

Post by orblivion »

danssig wrote: post #89
lincolnq wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Offtopic, but the parent post should not be downvoted. It clearly adds to the discussion. (I can barely read it to make sense of the replies!) Please, don't downvote when you think someone is wrong; downvote when their post doesn't contribute.

I disagree. The above post does not add anything but propaganda to the discussion. The US has had decades to prove what the poster said was true and utterly failed. "Scammy socialist" health care has utterly won.

No, you don't get to call something propaganda just because you disagree with it. Plenty of people can come up with proof for all sorts of points of view, I don't think you're special here.

Edit: The other side can say the same thing, and now you're stuck with two ends who call each other propagandists and thus refuse to take each other seriously, which is a stalemate. What good does that do anybody?

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#94

Post by bengebre »

A lot of us New Yorkers use the Freelancers Union for health insurance. It solved this exact problem for me. They're more of a service platform for independent workers than a union. They've got health, dental and 401k plans.

http://www.freelancersunion.org/

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#95

Post by DrJokepu »

dnautics wrote: post #56
Loic wrote: post #51

For information, here in Germany, from where I run my startup which itself is a UK Limited, I provide my employees with full health insurance (teeth, sick days, everything), pension, unemployment insurance, etc. for basically €700/month for an after tax salary of about €2500/month. As soon as you start to factor in all the costs of insurance, etc., doing business in the old Europe is pretty cheap. Even in Denmark, wh…

Why don't you believe in a free market for health insurance? Forcing people to pay into a health insurance is kind of scammy - let's say that I have a genetic condition that is certain to kill me rapidly at age 30. I want to live my life to the fullest, and I'd rather not be forced to buy health insurance that protects me from things like adult onset diabetes, alzheimer's, cancer, parkinson's, etc, that I'm just not…

> Why don't you believe in a free market for health insurance?

There are two main reasons. First of all, as someone mentioned it in another thread here a few days ago, healthcare does not follow the rules of supply and demand, since people would pay anything for survival. You're never going to say that "ah this treatment is a bit overpriced; I think I'll get more value for my money if I'll just die instead". It's ridiculous. Second, there are various domains where the short term interests of various parties do not coincide with the long terms interests of everyone, hence regulation is needed. This is not political theory, it's game theory, it is nothing to do with personal opinion. It's a fact.

> Let's say that I have a genetic condition that is certain to kill me rapidly at age 30

You probably don't want to die then at 25 after not receiving a treatment after having car accident.

> Why should I be forced to pony up for other people's healthcare, too?

It's called compassion and it is a cornerstone of our civilization.

> The more insidious thing about universal healthcare is that it really screws over most minorities.

I don't know about that. I am not a doctor so I don't know whether such conditions really exist, but my gut feeling is that almost all of the stuff people get treated for are universal across various minorities.

> What if those who decide health coverage decide that heterozygous genetic condition X is covered...

I think this must be a fundamental, antagonistic difference between our world views. As a European conservative, I truly believe that no life is unnecessary, no life is wasted.

> ultimately, going to be a transfer of wealth from the poor (via inflation) to those who have the right genetic predisposition to conditions

Most of the things people get treated for have nothing or almost nothing to do with genetic conditions. There is no gene for suffering a car accident. While having unlucky genes could decrease the chances of survival, ultimately everyone can get cancer.

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#96

Post by dfox »

Loic wrote: post #51

For information, here in Germany, from where I run my startup which itself is a UK Limited, I provide my employees with full health insurance (teeth, sick days, everything), pension, unemployment insurance, etc. for basically €700/month for an after tax salary of about €2500/month. As soon as you start to factor in all the costs of insurance, etc., doing business in the old Europe is pretty cheap. Even in Denmark, wh…

what I don't like on european (interpolating from czech, but it's probably quite similar everywhere in europe) health and welfare insurance is that you generally can't opt-out from that. Complete opt-out is probably bad idea, but I would like to pay insurance only when I actually have income, not be obliged by law to pay what equates to half of my other expenses every month. It seems fair to me to roll these "insurances" into income tax, as it is essentially nothing different from income tax (although logic of caps is different on income tax and this "insurances").

I'm perfectly willing to pay significantly more than is obligatory, but only when my income for given period allows that.

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#97

Post by klbarry »

bengebre wrote: post #94

A lot of us New Yorkers use the Freelancers Union for health insurance. It solved this exact problem for me. They're more of a service platform for independent workers than a union. They've got health, dental and 401k plans. http://www.freelancersunion.org/

I've seen their advertisements, they look awesome. If I wasn't already covered by my parents plan I would go for it.

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#98

Post by anamax »

mcculley wrote: post #74
netcan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not in the US, this is a actual question. Is this different in some fundamental way from not being able to offer a high enough salary?

Yes, individuals cannot buy health insurance for the same rates that employers pay. Some individuals cannot buy health insurance at all if they have preexisting conditions.

> Some individuals cannot buy health insurance at all if they have preexisting conditions.

That's true only if they let their insurance lapse. As long as they don't do that, they can stay with their current, switch, etc, all without waiting periods or a significant premium relative to "well people". (It's been that way for years.)

That's why I wouldn't let insurance lapse if I had a pre-existing condition, so why do folks with pre-existing conditions let their insurance lapse? Or, are we assuming that they do without cause or that they don't know the rules?

Or, are "we" ranting about the system without knowing rules that don't apply to us?

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#99

Post by anamax »

Locke1689 wrote: post #33
orangecat wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that employer-based health insurance is idiotic and economically destructive (conservative and libertarian analysts have been saying so for decades), but your blatant partisanship is not helpful. In 2008 John McCain's platform included a migration away from employer coverage by treating benefits as taxable income, while simultaneously granting a refundable tax credit for the purchase of individual insura…

Let's please not have political discussions on HN.

> Let's please not have political discussions on HN.

It's interesting that you chose to respond to the person who demonstrated "dems good, republicans bad" was wrong instead of the person who just asserted "dems good, republicans bad".

Re: Is employer-based health insurance a barrier to entrepreneurship?

#100

Post by danssig »

orblivion wrote: post #93
danssig wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The above post does not add anything but propaganda to the discussion. The US has had decades to prove what the poster said was true and utterly failed. "Scammy socialist" health care has utterly won.

No, you don't get to call something propaganda just because you disagree with it. Plenty of people can come up with proof for all sorts of points of view, I don't think you're special here. Edit: The other side can say the same thing, and now you're stuck with two ends who call each other propagandists and thus refuse to take each other seriously, which is a stalemate. What good does that do anybody?

No, again, there is no "other side". There is no first world country that has anything approaching a "free market" health care system. I'm not aware of anything like that working anywhere in the world at all.

So, yes, someone jumping out and saying "duh, people sure are stupid, of course we should be using " is not "just an opinion to disagree with", it's propaganda.

EDIT: Misspelling

Post reply on HN