3 ms·
A small nit: "Original Medicare" isn't really a UBI because you don't really get to choose your healthcare. A key benefit of a UBI is that the government provid
by bhupy 6y ago
A small nit: "Original Medicare" isn't really a UBI because you don't really get to choose your healthcare. A key benefit of a UBI is that the government provides cash to buy goods & services, rather than providing the goods & services themselves. Medicare is a government-run service, where the service is a combination of catastrophic insurance, cost-sharing, and general payment.
Medicare Part C, or Medicare Advantage, is much closer to a UBI than "Original Medicare". Nearly 40% of Medicare beneficiaries are enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan.
- toomuchtodo 6y agoFair context to provide. In a previous comment [1], I argue the case for keeping both UBI and single payer healthcare. Cash alone makes a poor safety net, because humans are humans. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23246811 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23246811
- bhupy 6y agoAgree, but I'd push back on the "single payer healthcare" bit and say that "Single payer" is not the only way to deliver universal healthcare. Germany, Switzerland, Netherlands, Singapore all have thriving multi-payer systems. In Switzerland and the Netherlands, ALL insurance is private. In Singapore, while the government covers catastrophic care, 70% of total health expenditures are private. The common theme is that there is some degree of government intervention and regulation, but having the government be the sole payer is definitely an approach, but it's by no means the only approach, nor even the best approach.