3 ms·

Employer sponsored health insurance is an outpost of neofeudalism. Swear your fealty to a lord or go without.

paulddraper 8y ago
Yes. And it was made even worse by the ACA which effectively required employers to be feudal lords, whether they wanted to or not. Before, the possibility of sane choose-my-health-insurance-like-I-choose-my-car-insurance was at least on the table.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
jkingsbery 8y ago
Employee sponsored health insurance is a result of "centrally planned" economics - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-reason-the-us-has-employer-sponsored-health-insurance.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-reason-th... ... it has nothing to do with feudalism or even what employers wanted, but has a lot more to do with government officials who thought they could design an economy.
- dredmorbius 8y ago
  The reasons things start, and the reasons they persist, are often quite different. The US doesn't seem to have subscribed to strongly-cenralised economic policy for nearly 70 years. And yet the employer-feudal healthcare system continues. Preponderance of evidence suggests that dominant economic, financial, and power structures prefer it that way. The origin story is an interesting footnote, no more.
  - jkingsbery 8y ago
    While it's true the reason things start and persist are different, many would disagree about the level of central planning in the US, with healthcare being an example odd where there is a good deal of government control (everything from pricing of procedures, drug approval, and licensing to name a few). Whether that's a good thing is another question, but I think it's oversimplifying to conclude that the problem is all due to corporate feudal overlords and not at all due to government policy. Further, there is a lesson to be learned concerning unanticipated co sequences in the origin of the current system that we're in danger of repeating by having further government control of healthcare.

Yes. And it was made even worse by the ACA which effectively required employers to be feudal lords, whether they wanted to or not. Before, the possibility of sane choose-my-health-insurance-like-I-choose-my-car-insurance was at least on the table.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

jkingsbery 8y ago

Employee sponsored health insurance is a result of "centrally planned" economics - https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-reason-the-us-has-employer-sponsored-health-insurance.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/05/upshot/the-real-reason-th... ... it has nothing to do with feudalism or even what employers wanted, but has a lot more to do with government officials who thought they could design an economy.

dredmorbius 8y ago
The reasons things start, and the reasons they persist, are often quite different. The US doesn't seem to have subscribed to strongly-cenralised economic policy for nearly 70 years. And yet the employer-feudal healthcare system continues. Preponderance of evidence suggests that dominant economic, financial, and power structures prefer it that way. The origin story is an interesting footnote, no more.
- jkingsbery 8y ago
  While it's true the reason things start and persist are different, many would disagree about the level of central planning in the US, with healthcare being an example odd where there is a good deal of government control (everything from pricing of procedures, drug approval, and licensing to name a few). Whether that's a good thing is another question, but I think it's oversimplifying to conclude that the problem is all due to corporate feudal overlords and not at all due to government policy. Further, there is a lesson to be learned concerning unanticipated co sequences in the origin of the current system that we're in danger of repeating by having further government control of healthcare.