4 ms·

> Vorweg ist anzumerken, dass die in Deutschland vorgenommene Trennung zwischen Steuern und Sozialabgaben in vielen Staaten nicht üblich ist. Daher verstehen in

• lispm 9y ago
  Paper published by the World Health Organization http://www.who.int/health_financing/taxed_based_financing_dp_04_4.pdf http://www.who.int/health_financing/taxed_based_financing_dp... > Tax-Based Financing for Health Systems: Options and Experiences > social insurance, private insurance and general taxation Social insurance is the German model. > By contrast, Germany's policy to combine its sickness funds into a social health insurance system -- generally credited as the first effort to enact universal health insurance coverage -- dates from the second half of the 19th century. or see: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.628.5428&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.628... > Social Health Insurance vs. Tax-Financed Health Systems—Evidence from the OECD SHI -> German model. > it was in Germany and neighboring countries that SHI began Also see: https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/how-health-care-is-funded https://www.kingsfund.org.uk/publications/how-health-care-is... Options discussed: Taxation, Private Health Insurance, Social Health Insurance, User charges as an additional source of financing https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628174/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628174/ > Current Trends in Health Insurance Systems: OECD Countries vs. Japan > There are three major types of social health-care systems: social insurance systems like Japan, France, and Germany, tax-based system like the United Kingdom and Sweden, and the United States—limited service to the elderly or disabled, called Medicare (Table 1). Again, Germany has a social insurance system, not a tax-based system.
  • germanier 9y ago
    While it certainly makes sense to discuss the difference, for a US-based audience it doesn't make much sense to pedantically point out that these aren't taxes. Social insurance contributions are mandatory, based on income, and to a state entity (though independent from the government) enforced through exactly the same channels as regular taxation (as opposed to private debt). The important difference is that they are legally committed to a certain issue (in this case: health insurance) and can't be appropriated to something else. That should be pointed out, yes, but the word "taxes" is internationally still appropriate for that.
    • lispm 9y ago
      That's simply not the case. It is exactly for an US audience important, because the German system is vastly different: universal health care, regulated by the government, 99.9% coverage, run by a system of 100+ insurers and various health care providers. > Social insurance contributions are mandatory Mandatory is to be insured. > based on income in a range, or if one is privately insured one pays based on risk/age Family members (wife/husband + kids) without income are insured. Plus various other regulations. > to a state entity Krankenkassen and Krankenversicherungen are not generally state entities. Would you call something like the Audi BKK a state entity? https://www.audibkk.de/english/ https://www.audibkk.de/english/ > enforced through exactly the same channels as regular taxation No, health care contributions are paid directly to the Krankenkasse/Krankenversicherung where one is a member, not the tax administration (Finanzamt). > That should be pointed out, yes, but the word "taxes" is internationally still appropriate for that. Obviously not. In the health care domain, the Social Insurance systems and tax-based health care systems are different models.
      • ams6110 9y ago
        > Mandatory is to be insured. While I will admit there are varying interpretation, for me, living in the USA, if I am mandated to pay for something, it's a tax. I take it that as a German, working in Germany, I could not "opt out" of all of this and just take my chances?