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

Do not compare EU salaries with the US

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 109 posts

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#91

Post by edbob »

handelaar wrote: post #41
rayiner wrote: post #32

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts: > I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs About 5% of people work more than one job in the US: https://www.qualityinfo.org/-/it-takes-two-or-more-oregon-s-... In Germany, where the author is based, that figure is 3.5 million of a labor force of 45 million--over 7% https://www.dw.com/e…

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts * Your comparison between Portugal's social security system and the US's includes only one source of support, but several are available. (Cost of housing is one.) Neglecting this easily-verifiable fact has the same misinformational outcome as lying. * "Medicaid has extremely low out-of-pocket costs" is…

> "Medicaid has extremely low out-of-pocket costs" is not a reply to "we didn't pay a fucking cent". Your (not-included) estimates of how much money a US resident definitely will have to pay is by definition never going to be as good as zero. It's almost like you're setting out to smooth over this also-easily-verifiable fact with "rhetoric".

This reasoning is absurd. If I have to pay $10/mo in the US, but I make $100/mo more in the US, then I'm still up $90/mo. No one cares about "not paying a fucking cent" if "not paying" actually means "I'm $90/mo poorer".

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#92

Post by tptacek »

raverbashing wrote: post #47
rayiner wrote: post #32

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts: > I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs About 5% of people work more than one job in the US: https://www.qualityinfo.org/-/it-takes-two-or-more-oregon-s-... In Germany, where the author is based, that figure is 3.5 million of a labor force of 45 million--over 7% https://www.dw.com/e…

You're technically correct, but are picking at straws Lies, damn lies and statistics. Even from your link: > Nearly 3 million people worked a "minijob" — meaning they earned €450 ($499) or less per month — on the side of a full-time job. So they have a "main job". How many of those in the US would just be unaccounted for? How big is the size of "under the table" jobs in the US? How easy is to qualify for Medicaid or…

His analysis acknowledges the cost of living in Portugal.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#94

Post by marcinzm »

marcinzm wrote: post #73
rayiner wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's why we spent a bunch of money creating the ACA. If I was a single person here in Maryland making $24,000 per year, I could get a low-deductible health plan for $115/month (and a high-deductible one for a fraction of that). That's 5.75% of gross income, which is lower than the health-insurance tax a lower middle class person would pay in most European countries.

The issue is that insurance companies don't always pay out as they have incentive to find ways to avoid paying. Then you're on the hook. If I remember, deductibles for example don't fully cover many hospital stays so you get hit with out of pocket costs. Those have a maximum cap but I'm sure there's some caveats if you end up in a hospital that's not in network for example. This is what people talk about when they sa…

To expand on this. The average healthcare cost in the US is $7k/year/person for the working age population. Children are an additional $3k/child/year. Since insurance companies are private businesses they will be paid $7k/year/person on average. No loopholes, no ifs, no buts. As such, no matter what your plan says or what the tradeoffs are (deductible, monthly, etc.), on average you will be paying them $7k/year/person. If you're paying for it yourself then that price will be paid by you. Now, you can avoid medical treatments to lower that price but I hope it's obvious why that's not a good social solution.

That price may come out of monthly premiums, deductibles, out of pockets or copays but it will be paid out on average.

In a universal healthcare system the government can use progressive taxes to subsidize this cost for the less well off. In a private system that isn't the case.

So if you make $24k/year that comes out to 30% of your income. Assuming you get the average standard of medical care in the US. You may get lucky and avoid this but lotteries aren't good ways to live life.

edit: Please note I'm talking about the working age population. I don't think the elderly make sense in this discussion given that there's government health coverage for them.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#95

Post by dragonwriter »

marcinzm wrote: post #94
marcinzm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that insurance companies don't always pay out as they have incentive to find ways to avoid paying. Then you're on the hook. If I remember, deductibles for example don't fully cover many hospital stays so you get hit with out of pocket costs. Those have a maximum cap but I'm sure there's some caveats if you end up in a hospital that's not in network for example. This is what people talk about when they sa…

To expand on this. The average healthcare cost in the US is $7k/year/person for the working age population. Children are an additional $3k/child/year. Since insurance companies are private businesses they will be paid $7k/year/person on average. No loopholes, no ifs, no buts. As such, no matter what your plan says or what the tradeoffs are (deductible, monthly, etc.), on average you will be paying them $7k/year/perso…

> The average healthcare cost in the US is $7k/year/person for the working age population. Children are an additional $3k/child/year.

Actual US healthcare spending in 2019 was $11,582/person.

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Sta...

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#96

Post by rayiner »

marcinzm wrote: post #94
marcinzm wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is that insurance companies don't always pay out as they have incentive to find ways to avoid paying. Then you're on the hook. If I remember, deductibles for example don't fully cover many hospital stays so you get hit with out of pocket costs. Those have a maximum cap but I'm sure there's some caveats if you end up in a hospital that's not in network for example. This is what people talk about when they sa…

To expand on this. The average healthcare cost in the US is $7k/year/person for the working age population. Children are an additional $3k/child/year. Since insurance companies are private businesses they will be paid $7k/year/person on average. No loopholes, no ifs, no buts. As such, no matter what your plan says or what the tradeoffs are (deductible, monthly, etc.), on average you will be paying them $7k/year/perso…

> The average healthcare cost in the US is $7k/year/person for the working age population.... In a universal healthcare system the government can use progressive taxes to subsidize this cost for the less well off.

Except we don't have a fully-private system. We have Medicaid, which covers the working-age poor, and also people with disabilities which is a very high-cost group. Then we have Medicare taking the high-cost elderly population. And then we have ACA potentially subsidizing much of the rest.

> So if you make $24k/year that comes out to 30% of your income.

In Maryland, a low-deductible Kaiser ACA Gold plan for a 36-year old making $24,000 per year costs $3,864/year. But the government pays $2,533 of that, leaving you to pay $1,380 + out of pocket costs.

Out of pocket expenditures in the U.S. add up to about $1,100/year on average: https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/indicator/access-afforda.... But note that other countries have out-of-pocket costs too. Even in France, where point-of-use costs are very low, it's still $463/year.

Your typical person making $24,000 per year is going to be young, and not rack up $1,380 in out of pocket costs each year. But adding that in, you're looking at 10.3%.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#97

Post by jelliclesfarm »

rayiner wrote: post #32

Whatever your politics, we should endeavor to stop giving oxygen to rhetoric that misstates easily verifiable facts: > I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs About 5% of people work more than one job in the US: https://www.qualityinfo.org/-/it-takes-two-or-more-oregon-s-... In Germany, where the author is based, that figure is 3.5 million of a labor force of 45 million--over 7% https://www.dw.com/e…

Thanks for the data.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#98

Post by NoRagrets »

pidg wrote: post #81
raverbashing wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're technically correct, but are picking at straws Lies, damn lies and statistics. Even from your link: > Nearly 3 million people worked a "minijob" — meaning they earned €450 ($499) or less per month — on the side of a full-time job. So they have a "main job". How many of those in the US would just be unaccounted for? How big is the size of "under the table" jobs in the US? How easy is to qualify for Medicaid or…

Not to mention that Portugal has a nationalised healthcare system. I think I'd rather have 430 Eur + nationalised healthcare than $1260 and have to pay out of pocket (or deal with years of paperwork and insurance claims)

The country’s left-wing coalition has prioritized private investment and economic growth over public services such as housing, education, and forest fire prevention.

https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/portugal-economy-p...

[..] The country’s left-wing coalition has prioritized private investment and economic growth over public services such as housing, education, and forest fire prevention.[..]

[..] PERKS FOR FOREIGNERS Portugal has tried since then to enhance its fiscal attractiveness as a stimulus to the real estate market. Since 2012, “golden visas”—five-year residence entitlements for non-EU foreigners who buy property in Portugal worth over €500,000—have brought in €4 billion. Non-habitual residency (NHR) status, which offers tax advantages, is available to EU pensioners who buy homes in Portugal.[..]

[..] BUDGETARY BOMB Portugal’s universities are almost bankrupt, and the health system is understaffed and under-resourced. The state body that runs the railways estimates that 60 percent of its infrastructure is in bad or mediocre condition. Social housing is just 2 percent of the housing stock. “A framework law on housing is currently being debated in parliament, but we already know how it will go,” said Rita Silva of Habita, a housing rights association. “Despite a few positive steps, there is no political will to invest public money in housing. [..]

And it goes on and on. Worth a read.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#99

Post by jelliclesfarm »

tao_oat wrote: post #9
exabrial wrote: post #3

It seems she's fairly ignorant of how things work here as the vast majority of his fears are unfounded. That's ok though, the point about comparing salaries is very valid, there's extreme cost of living differences among many other things. For a lot of Americans, the fear we have is being completely dependent on the government. Look at who is exiting presidential office, look who is entering. Attaching our fates to t…

What do you think her fears are, and why are they unfounded? I understood her primary point as being about inequality and justice: "I don't wanna make 250k while most people work three jobs"

I understood her primary point to be ‘no one should want to make 250k when most people work three jobs’.

Re: Do not compare EU salaries with the US

#100

Post by biggermike »

africanboy wrote: post #89
biggermike wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Medicaid is not "free" there are requirements, but assuming you qualify, there are hidden costs. Like for example. Totally different program (medicaid nursing home care) and not relevant because (1) it isn't medical care and (2) someone who has assets to draw down from is, by definition, not poor. > If after 4 years they want to gift their children with a few thousand euros to pay, for example, for their marriage,…

> someone who has assets to draw down from is, by definition, not poor. So it is a paid program Payed by your poverty. If you end up inheriting money from a distant uncle, you have to pay back. > you can't give away your money for the sole purpose of acquiring government benefits That's understandable. And it's only necessary because the country with the highest spending per capita on healthcare cannot agree that the…

> If you end up inheriting money from a distant uncle, you have to pay back.

If you inherit money from a distant uncle, your uncle is presumably no longer alive to utilize state provided long-term care and you don't have to pay anything back. You're trying to contrive a counterexample that simply isn't applicable.

Post reply on HN