5 ms·

I'd rather have cheap healthcare thanks

User23 8y ago
I'd rather have an economy where healthcare, housing, and education are so affordable that anyone with a high school diploma or better that is willing to work can afford to cover a family of 4 with money left over for entertainment and savings. We know this is possible, because the USA used to have it in living memory.
- tensor 8y ago
  It's possible today in Canada.
  - User23 8y ago
    Only with heavy government subsidies. The situation I describe didn't require that.
    - germinalphrase 8y ago
      Factually untrue: post-war housing was massively subsidized by the US government directly through FHA/GI Bill to buyers and significant infrastructure spending (US highway system, water/sanitation, etc). The US social contract was largely predicated on the idea that subsidizing citizens to obtain housing would lead them to be stable and productive workers/consumers and avoid communist tendencies. Of course, communism is not now a threat and we are likewise not seeing such public investment in any common vision for a renewed social contract.
      - User23 8y ago
        No doubt the mostly defense spending you describe provided fiscal stimulus to the economy and led to the benefits you list, but that's not the same as a subsidy, which would mean something like Section 8 vouchers. The real driving force was that wage growth massively outpaced costs. After the war ended it was routine to pay off a 15 year mortgage a decade early, because real wages rose so much. Similarly, our current lousy situation is the result of median real wages staying flat for decades.
  - kgwgk 8y ago
    I'm not sure housing is more affordable in Canada than in the US.
- humanrebar 8y ago
  To be fair, that was in the post war economy. The U.S. had a massive competitive advantage in having a not-bombed infrastructure. Young workers had a competitive advantage in not having to compete with people who died in the war. And there was a baby boom and a more economically engaged female population, creating new kinds of demands and opportunities for productivity.
  - oxide 8y ago
    So, the problem is a prevented, or maybe just a repeatedly delayed, World War III.
  - TomK32 8y ago
    Well, Germany had the advantage of having to build a 100% new infrastructure and that helped a lot to overtake those European countries that were on the winning side.
    - toomuchtodo 8y ago
      It seems like there’s a dark joke to be had here about US infrastructure.
  - flukus 8y ago
    I don't know when it ended in the US but this was doable into the 80's and possibly 90's in Australia (outside of Sydney), even if it was well on track to become not so doable. House prices becoming investment vehicles was the single biggest blow to this. It started getting out of control when the WW2 dead would have been retiring.
  - ecolonsmak 8y ago
    the war didn't cause that, us exports in the post war years didn't experience a wild surge. it was the progressive tax rates, 90% on income in excess of 400k/yr that forced investment into societal infrastructure, education and research and development in a way we haven't seen in the last 30 years.
- kevin_b_er 8y ago
  It was possible, but nowadays the money only trickles, not flows, down.
- jedberg 8y ago
  > We know this is possible, because the USA used to have it in living memory. If you look back at your history, you'll see that this only applied to the already wealthy part of the US for the most part, and for the most part the white people only.
  - User23 8y ago
    > If you look back at your history, you'll see that this only applied to the already wealthy part of the US for the most part This happy state of affairs was during the adulthood of the generation that grew up during the depression. The vast majority of the US population was poor, including those living in the cities. > for the most part the white people only. The USA was something like 95% white at the time, so how is this a helpful contribution to the conversation?
    - evgen 8y ago
      > The USA was something like 95% white at the time, so how is this a helpful contribution to the conversation? Is it really so hard to do simple research? In 1945 African-Americans were 10% of the population vs the current 12.6%.
    - jgoodhcg 8y ago
      20th century white population had a maximum of 89%. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic...
- cma 8y ago
  http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/120928062309-chart-us-tax-rate-over-the-years-story-top.jpg http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/120928062309-chart...
- test6554 8y ago
  We could have laughably affordable health care if a medical license was not required to practice medicine.
zacharytelschow 8y ago
So.... -> Make premiums deductible for people, not companies, severing the tie to employment. -> Require service providers to post prices so people know what the hell things cost. -> Allow sales across state lines to increase competition. -> Educate the public on what insurance is for (unexpected costs they can't afford). Your auto insurance doesn't cover oil changes. The problem isn't lack of government - the problem is government. Government provides services very poorly. And if you'd rather they did provide health care? Immigrate somewhere where they do.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- amaccuish 8y ago
  I'm not a US citizen. Merely the reason why I wouldn't move to the US. Low taxes don't attract me, stable government and good public services do. I guess just a different point of view :)
  - zacharytelschow 8y ago
    I can entirely respect that. The... somewhat jab at the end was directed towards those in the US constantly complaining about how "such and such country does it better." My reply has become: so move there! Virtually every country in the world accepts immigrants who are willing to contribute. If someone believes another country is far preferable based on their policies, I believe they should vote with their citizenship and move there.
    - amaccuish 8y ago
      I suspect you're being downvoted for the blutness of your jab, but I understand the sentiment :) I've moved once and I'm preparing at some point to do it again. But sadly not everyone can afford that, and that's the same people who stay awake at night worrying about their healthcare costs.
    - moorhosj 8y ago
woolvalley 8y ago
Healthcare would be cheaper as a percentage of GDP of it was single payer. If you put healthcare as part of the gov't GPD graph, the USA would be higher than places like Canada. South Korea also has single payer and has equal gov't GDP consumption as the USA.

I'd rather have an economy where healthcare, housing, and education are so affordable that anyone with a high school diploma or better that is willing to work can afford to cover a family of 4 with money left over for entertainment and savings. We know this is possible, because the USA used to have it in living memory.

tensor 8y ago
It's possible today in Canada.
- User23 8y ago
  Only with heavy government subsidies. The situation I describe didn't require that.
  - germinalphrase 8y ago
    Factually untrue: post-war housing was massively subsidized by the US government directly through FHA/GI Bill to buyers and significant infrastructure spending (US highway system, water/sanitation, etc). The US social contract was largely predicated on the idea that subsidizing citizens to obtain housing would lead them to be stable and productive workers/consumers and avoid communist tendencies. Of course, communism is not now a threat and we are likewise not seeing such public investment in any common vision for a renewed social contract.
    - User23 8y ago
      No doubt the mostly defense spending you describe provided fiscal stimulus to the economy and led to the benefits you list, but that's not the same as a subsidy, which would mean something like Section 8 vouchers. The real driving force was that wage growth massively outpaced costs. After the war ended it was routine to pay off a 15 year mortgage a decade early, because real wages rose so much. Similarly, our current lousy situation is the result of median real wages staying flat for decades.
- kgwgk 8y ago
  I'm not sure housing is more affordable in Canada than in the US.
humanrebar 8y ago
To be fair, that was in the post war economy. The U.S. had a massive competitive advantage in having a not-bombed infrastructure. Young workers had a competitive advantage in not having to compete with people who died in the war. And there was a baby boom and a more economically engaged female population, creating new kinds of demands and opportunities for productivity.
- oxide 8y ago
  So, the problem is a prevented, or maybe just a repeatedly delayed, World War III.
- TomK32 8y ago
  Well, Germany had the advantage of having to build a 100% new infrastructure and that helped a lot to overtake those European countries that were on the winning side.
  - toomuchtodo 8y ago
    It seems like there’s a dark joke to be had here about US infrastructure.
- flukus 8y ago
  I don't know when it ended in the US but this was doable into the 80's and possibly 90's in Australia (outside of Sydney), even if it was well on track to become not so doable. House prices becoming investment vehicles was the single biggest blow to this. It started getting out of control when the WW2 dead would have been retiring.
- ecolonsmak 8y ago
  the war didn't cause that, us exports in the post war years didn't experience a wild surge. it was the progressive tax rates, 90% on income in excess of 400k/yr that forced investment into societal infrastructure, education and research and development in a way we haven't seen in the last 30 years.
kevin_b_er 8y ago
It was possible, but nowadays the money only trickles, not flows, down.
jedberg 8y ago
> We know this is possible, because the USA used to have it in living memory. If you look back at your history, you'll see that this only applied to the already wealthy part of the US for the most part, and for the most part the white people only.
- User23 8y ago
  > If you look back at your history, you'll see that this only applied to the already wealthy part of the US for the most part This happy state of affairs was during the adulthood of the generation that grew up during the depression. The vast majority of the US population was poor, including those living in the cities. > for the most part the white people only. The USA was something like 95% white at the time, so how is this a helpful contribution to the conversation?
  - evgen 8y ago
    > The USA was something like 95% white at the time, so how is this a helpful contribution to the conversation? Is it really so hard to do simple research? In 1945 African-Americans were 10% of the population vs the current 12.6%.
  - jgoodhcg 8y ago
    20th century white population had a maximum of 89%. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic...
cma 8y ago
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/120928062309-chart-us-tax-rate-over-the-years-story-top.jpg http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/120928062309-chart...
test6554 8y ago
We could have laughably affordable health care if a medical license was not required to practice medicine.

zacharytelschow 8y ago

So.... -> Make premiums deductible for people, not companies, severing the tie to employment. -> Require service providers to post prices so people know what the hell things cost. -> Allow sales across state lines to increase competition. -> Educate the public on what insurance is for (unexpected costs they can't afford). Your auto insurance doesn't cover oil changes. The problem isn't lack of government - the problem is government. Government provides services very poorly. And if you'd rather they did provide health care? Immigrate somewhere where they do.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
amaccuish 8y ago
I'm not a US citizen. Merely the reason why I wouldn't move to the US. Low taxes don't attract me, stable government and good public services do. I guess just a different point of view :)
- zacharytelschow 8y ago
  I can entirely respect that. The... somewhat jab at the end was directed towards those in the US constantly complaining about how "such and such country does it better." My reply has become: so move there! Virtually every country in the world accepts immigrants who are willing to contribute. If someone believes another country is far preferable based on their policies, I believe they should vote with their citizenship and move there.
  - amaccuish 8y ago
    I suspect you're being downvoted for the blutness of your jab, but I understand the sentiment :) I've moved once and I'm preparing at some point to do it again. But sadly not everyone can afford that, and that's the same people who stay awake at night worrying about their healthcare costs.
  - moorhosj 8y ago

woolvalley 8y ago

Healthcare would be cheaper as a percentage of GDP of it was single payer. If you put healthcare as part of the gov't GPD graph, the USA would be higher than places like Canada. South Korea also has single payer and has equal gov't GDP consumption as the USA.