4 ms·

>One of the fallacies in play is buying insurance is put in one category. Whereas paying taxes for insurance is another. The first is 'good' because it's 'free

>One of the fallacies in play is buying insurance is put in one category. Whereas paying taxes for insurance is another. The first is 'good' because it's 'free market' and the second is 'bad' because it's the government taking your money's. Well, I'm in favor of socialized healthcare and generally receptive to increased taxation, so that's definitely not the implication I was going for. But it is true that there doesn't need to be a categorical consideration at all. A more sound statement would be "I as a consumer am willing to pay dollars equal to twice my current premiums to get healthcare coverage while avoiding hassles while receiving routine healthcare" In truth I'm not making a blanket argument for any government-run healthcare system because alleviating my pain points necessarily depends on said system being efficient and well implemented. But I KNOW that the free market isn't suddenly going to start improving on these pain points without introduction of regulations to manage issues like competing doctor networks, confusing healthcare coding and opaque pricing, etc, and I have no trust that the free market types in congress have any interest in regulations of any kind, so I personally err on the side of socialized healthcare on this one.

nybble41 8y ago
> A more sound statement would be "I as a consumer am willing to pay dollars equal to twice my current premiums to get healthcare coverage while avoiding hassles while receiving routine healthcare" Ah, but are you willing to force everyone else pay twice as much so that you can get the health care you want? That's the real question. You said you were in favor of socialized healthcare, so I would guess the answer to that question is "yes", but let's at least be honest here—the private vs. public debate is never about how much you are willing to pay. Under a private system you're free to buy as much healthcare as you can afford. The point of socializing healthcare is making other people pay.
- helen___keller 8y ago
  > generally receptive to increased taxation
  - nybble41 8y ago
    Yes, that's the "making other people pay" part.
    - helen___keller 8y ago
      Right I guess you were being rhetorical then, I'm saying I'm okay with it
- jfk13 8y ago
  > are you willing to force everyone else pay twice as much Comparisons to other (first-world) countries with socialized healthcare systems suggest that it shouldn't be necessary for everyone to pay twice as much. If everyone paid exactly the same amount as they currently do (in tax + insurance premiums) there should be plenty to fund a first-world-standard national health system. > you're free to buy as much healthcare as you can afford It's difficult to know what you can afford when you can't find out even an approximate price until it's over and the bill arrives.
  - nybble41 8y ago
    > If everyone paid exactly the same amount as they currently do (in tax + insurance premiums) there should be plenty to fund a first-world-standard national health system. Right. Regardless of whether health care is paid for privately or via taxes, it's obvious that the problem isn't that we're not spending enough money. > It's difficult to know what you can afford when you can't find out even an approximate price until it's over and the bill arrives. I agree that prices and billing should be more transparent. It's crazy that they expect you to agree to pay whatever they might choose to bill, months or years after the fact, without even the courtesy of a binding estimate. I think a good argument could be made that these are not valid contracts and you should be able to walk away from them without penalty; they only get away with this sort of borderline-fraudulent behavior because the law grants health care providers special status. This situation is not improved by changing things so that health care providers don't even need your formal consent, or any interaction at all for that matter, to bill you via the IRS, with no contractual obligation on their part to provide any services whatsoever in return.
- kjdndisneinj 8y ago
  > The point of socializing healthcare is making other people pay. Yes. Especially you personally. Honestly, I don't even care about socialized healthcare as long as your tax rate is > 90%. Think of it as a "stupid libertarian tax". I think most people will be in support of this measure, as hopefully it will force you to work so hard you don't have time to make inane internet comments.

nybble41 8y ago

> A more sound statement would be "I as a consumer am willing to pay dollars equal to twice my current premiums to get healthcare coverage while avoiding hassles while receiving routine healthcare" Ah, but are you willing to force everyone else pay twice as much so that you can get the health care you want? That's the real question. You said you were in favor of socialized healthcare, so I would guess the answer to that question is "yes", but let's at least be honest here—the private vs. public debate is never about how much you are willing to pay. Under a private system you're free to buy as much healthcare as you can afford. The point of socializing healthcare is making other people pay.

helen___keller 8y ago
> generally receptive to increased taxation
- nybble41 8y ago
  Yes, that's the "making other people pay" part.
  - helen___keller 8y ago
    Right I guess you were being rhetorical then, I'm saying I'm okay with it
jfk13 8y ago
> are you willing to force everyone else pay twice as much Comparisons to other (first-world) countries with socialized healthcare systems suggest that it shouldn't be necessary for everyone to pay twice as much. If everyone paid exactly the same amount as they currently do (in tax + insurance premiums) there should be plenty to fund a first-world-standard national health system. > you're free to buy as much healthcare as you can afford It's difficult to know what you can afford when you can't find out even an approximate price until it's over and the bill arrives.
- nybble41 8y ago
  > If everyone paid exactly the same amount as they currently do (in tax + insurance premiums) there should be plenty to fund a first-world-standard national health system. Right. Regardless of whether health care is paid for privately or via taxes, it's obvious that the problem isn't that we're not spending enough money. > It's difficult to know what you can afford when you can't find out even an approximate price until it's over and the bill arrives. I agree that prices and billing should be more transparent. It's crazy that they expect you to agree to pay whatever they might choose to bill, months or years after the fact, without even the courtesy of a binding estimate. I think a good argument could be made that these are not valid contracts and you should be able to walk away from them without penalty; they only get away with this sort of borderline-fraudulent behavior because the law grants health care providers special status. This situation is not improved by changing things so that health care providers don't even need your formal consent, or any interaction at all for that matter, to bill you via the IRS, with no contractual obligation on their part to provide any services whatsoever in return.
kjdndisneinj 8y ago
> The point of socializing healthcare is making other people pay. Yes. Especially you personally. Honestly, I don't even care about socialized healthcare as long as your tax rate is > 90%. Think of it as a "stupid libertarian tax". I think most people will be in support of this measure, as hopefully it will force you to work so hard you don't have time to make inane internet comments.