5 ms·

I'm reminded of the Breaking Bad Canada comic. "You have cancer. Treatment starts next week. The End." When I see "heartwarming" stories on tv about people don

I'm reminded of the Breaking Bad Canada comic. "You have cancer. Treatment starts next week. The End." When I see "heartwarming" stories on tv about people donating to people that need help I can't help but think it would be more "heartwarming" to have a government that tried to make sure people wouldn't need to depend on the kindness of strangers for health care.

robert_foss 8y ago
That to me is one of the most striking observations from spending time in the US. Good outcomes are singled out and praised, but there isn't a system in place to make sure that good outcomes can be expected. This applies to health-care, funding for universities/hospitals/libraries/etc., or just making sure people have food on the table. To exemplify this, aren't food donation campaigns sort of missing the mark. Yes they provide a valuable service, but the service it self shouldn't be required. And in return for having you most basic needs like healtcare/education/food covered, why aren't people fine with paying some taxes for this? I thought I've had is that the nature of having states 'compete' against each other with lower taxes plays a part in this vilification of taxes. But surely this would only explain a small part of this problem.
- chooseaname 8y ago
  > And in return for having you most basic needs like healtcare/education/food covered, why aren't people fine with paying some taxes for this? I thought I've had is that the nature of having states 'compete' against each other with lower taxes plays a part in this vilification of taxes. But surely this would only explain a small part of this problem. Because certain people in government convince people that citizens can manage their money better than the government can. Forget about the purchasing power of pooling your money (by way of taxes). Then you have people like Mitch McConnell who calls programs for the less fortunate as "entitlements". The people who need these services don't feel "entitled". Not one bit.
  - ouid 8y ago
    Except that they are entitled to it, calling them entitlements is not wrong. "Entitlements" is just another word for "rights".
  - ianai 8y ago
    The whole libertarian and conservative sales pitch is just a sales pitch for business practices that hurt the many at the betterment of the corporations or rich few. They clamp divisive stances onto it to pull single issue voters into their pool. Whether any of their actual enacted laws decrease deficits or increase personal freedoms isn’t even discussed routinely. (The last time the US ran a budget surplus a D was in the White House. Deregulating is always pitched as a positive but winds up in selling people less than they had before - relaxation of banking regulations leading to recessions, etc)
    - tmoertel 8y ago
      I don't think you've accurately represented the libertarian pitch, which is that government bureaucrats, even if they are well meaning and better planners than you are, are not likely to understand your needs, wants, and preferences nearly as well as you are and, further, are likely to have incentives other than your welfare – careerism, political winds, and the pleadings of special interests, to name a few.
      - ianai 8y ago
        I don’t need to represent what is already widely marketed. In 2019 everyone knows the libertarian pitch.
  - orangecat 8y ago
    Because certain people in government convince people that citizens can manage their money better than the government can. And this is wrong? Look at the absurd high speed rail costs, or the bloated military budget, or SLS vs SpaceX. Then you have people like Mitch McConnell who calls programs for the less fortunate as "entitlements". "Entitlements" is a standard term used to distinguish those programs from discretionary spending.
lotsofpulp 8y ago
The people that need the help are overwhelmingly declaring that they don’t want the government’s help.
- aaronbrethorst 8y ago
  This is demonstrably false. Here's one person's story (who I happen to know): https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/one-womans-ultimate-protest-pass-the-healthcare-bill-and-i-end-treatment/457243275 https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/one-womans-ultimate... And then here's the data on improved access to health care: https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer-national-health-plans-and-expanding-access-to-medicare-coverage/ https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer...
mikeq101101 8y ago
People being forced to pay for someone's healthcare is more heartwarming to you than people voluntarily paying for someone's healthcare?
- pbourke 8y ago
  I find it telling that this particular argument is only trotted out against the idea of universal health care. It’s not used in disagreement with military spending, subsidizing religious institutions, agricultural and land-use supports, etc.
- jccalhoun 8y ago
  I would rather we didn't have to have "heartwarming" stories like this at all.
- pcbro141 8y ago
  I would say so. It's very sad to think of someone dying from a treatable condition because their GoFundMe campaign wasn't popular enough.
  - mikeq101101 8y ago
    I just can't see using violence against peaceful people, for whatever cause, as heartwarming.
    - whatislovecraft 8y ago
      Are you suggesting that taxation is equal to violence? I'm confused. If these are the opinions of Americans, then I think I have found out why the "US is a Rich Country with Symptoms of a Developing Nation". Viewing taxation as direct threat of violence 10000% will result in a crumbling society that is built on democracy and taxation.
      - DanBC 8y ago
        > Are you suggesting that taxation is equal to violence? It's a frequent comment on HN and it's fucking stupid everytime.

robert_foss 8y ago

That to me is one of the most striking observations from spending time in the US. Good outcomes are singled out and praised, but there isn't a system in place to make sure that good outcomes can be expected. This applies to health-care, funding for universities/hospitals/libraries/etc., or just making sure people have food on the table. To exemplify this, aren't food donation campaigns sort of missing the mark. Yes they provide a valuable service, but the service it self shouldn't be required. And in return for having you most basic needs like healtcare/education/food covered, why aren't people fine with paying some taxes for this? I thought I've had is that the nature of having states 'compete' against each other with lower taxes plays a part in this vilification of taxes. But surely this would only explain a small part of this problem.

chooseaname 8y ago
> And in return for having you most basic needs like healtcare/education/food covered, why aren't people fine with paying some taxes for this? I thought I've had is that the nature of having states 'compete' against each other with lower taxes plays a part in this vilification of taxes. But surely this would only explain a small part of this problem. Because certain people in government convince people that citizens can manage their money better than the government can. Forget about the purchasing power of pooling your money (by way of taxes). Then you have people like Mitch McConnell who calls programs for the less fortunate as "entitlements". The people who need these services don't feel "entitled". Not one bit.
- ouid 8y ago
  Except that they are entitled to it, calling them entitlements is not wrong. "Entitlements" is just another word for "rights".
- ianai 8y ago
  The whole libertarian and conservative sales pitch is just a sales pitch for business practices that hurt the many at the betterment of the corporations or rich few. They clamp divisive stances onto it to pull single issue voters into their pool. Whether any of their actual enacted laws decrease deficits or increase personal freedoms isn’t even discussed routinely. (The last time the US ran a budget surplus a D was in the White House. Deregulating is always pitched as a positive but winds up in selling people less than they had before - relaxation of banking regulations leading to recessions, etc)
  - tmoertel 8y ago
    I don't think you've accurately represented the libertarian pitch, which is that government bureaucrats, even if they are well meaning and better planners than you are, are not likely to understand your needs, wants, and preferences nearly as well as you are and, further, are likely to have incentives other than your welfare – careerism, political winds, and the pleadings of special interests, to name a few.
    - ianai 8y ago
      I don’t need to represent what is already widely marketed. In 2019 everyone knows the libertarian pitch.
- orangecat 8y ago
  Because certain people in government convince people that citizens can manage their money better than the government can. And this is wrong? Look at the absurd high speed rail costs, or the bloated military budget, or SLS vs SpaceX. Then you have people like Mitch McConnell who calls programs for the less fortunate as "entitlements". "Entitlements" is a standard term used to distinguish those programs from discretionary spending.

lotsofpulp 8y ago

The people that need the help are overwhelmingly declaring that they don’t want the government’s help.

aaronbrethorst 8y ago
This is demonstrably false. Here's one person's story (who I happen to know): https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/one-womans-ultimate-protest-pass-the-healthcare-bill-and-i-end-treatment/457243275 https://www.king5.com/article/news/local/one-womans-ultimate... And then here's the data on improved access to health care: https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer-national-health-plans-and-expanding-access-to-medicare-coverage/ https://www.kff.org/slideshow/public-opinion-on-single-payer...

mikeq101101 8y ago

People being forced to pay for someone's healthcare is more heartwarming to you than people voluntarily paying for someone's healthcare?

pbourke 8y ago
I find it telling that this particular argument is only trotted out against the idea of universal health care. It’s not used in disagreement with military spending, subsidizing religious institutions, agricultural and land-use supports, etc.
jccalhoun 8y ago
I would rather we didn't have to have "heartwarming" stories like this at all.
pcbro141 8y ago
I would say so. It's very sad to think of someone dying from a treatable condition because their GoFundMe campaign wasn't popular enough.
- mikeq101101 8y ago
  I just can't see using violence against peaceful people, for whatever cause, as heartwarming.
  - whatislovecraft 8y ago
    Are you suggesting that taxation is equal to violence? I'm confused. If these are the opinions of Americans, then I think I have found out why the "US is a Rich Country with Symptoms of a Developing Nation". Viewing taxation as direct threat of violence 10000% will result in a crumbling society that is built on democracy and taxation.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > Are you suggesting that taxation is equal to violence? It's a frequent comment on HN and it's fucking stupid everytime.