4 ms·

What inspires someone to write a jack-assed comment like this?

aasasd 4y ago
HWR_14 4y ago
Probably someone who wants to talk about the vast increase in hospital costs, especially to patients, over the past ~50+ years. You know, as opposed to what the article is about.
- eesmith 4y ago
  Except childbirth cost more than $1 in the 1960s. https://www.workingmomsagainstguilt.com/the-cost-of-having-a-baby-in-1950/ https://www.workingmomsagainstguilt.com/the-cost-of-having-a... gives an example of $86.33 in 1950. https://www.cryo-cell.com/blog/april-2017/when-childbirth-cost-100-dollars https://www.cryo-cell.com/blog/april-2017/when-childbirth-co... shows $165 for 1950, $155 for 1957, etc.
  - HWR_14 4y ago
    1) Yes, it's a slight case of hyperbole 2) The majority of the $165 in 1950 was the 1 week hospital stay (and 6 days of nursery care) instead of a 1 day hospital stay. 3) After accounting for the 1 week hospital stay, the biggest remaining cost was for anesthesia. Which is always expensive. Epidurals instead should have driven the costs way down. 4) So that would leave $45 if they left after a modern hospital stay with an epidural. 5) This was in NYC, so it should be higher than average. 6) After adjusting for inflation, that $165 is still more than the out of pocket costs for childbirth today
    - eesmith 4y ago
      You forgot an adjustment. Julia Roberts was born in 1967, not 1950. 1950 was simply the first numbers I could find - and enough to show that $1 is off by at least a couple of orders of magnitude.
      - HWR_14 4y ago
        The numbers are pretty irrelevant. You are focusing on an example (not even one I proposed) instead of the point being made. Not that it's my point. But I do recognize that medical costs have skyrocketed.
        eesmith 4y ago
        Because I don't think the point you suggested is a likely explanation. Why does the author wish to imply Julia Roberts' parents were so poor they couldn't afford $1? Coretta Scott King paid off the bill as thanks for her parents' kindnesses towards black children in Atlanta. Is $1 - about $30 now - really that big of a thank you in 1967?

Probably someone who wants to talk about the vast increase in hospital costs, especially to patients, over the past ~50+ years. You know, as opposed to what the article is about.

eesmith 4y ago
Except childbirth cost more than $1 in the 1960s. https://www.workingmomsagainstguilt.com/the-cost-of-having-a-baby-in-1950/ https://www.workingmomsagainstguilt.com/the-cost-of-having-a... gives an example of $86.33 in 1950. https://www.cryo-cell.com/blog/april-2017/when-childbirth-cost-100-dollars https://www.cryo-cell.com/blog/april-2017/when-childbirth-co... shows $165 for 1950, $155 for 1957, etc.
- HWR_14 4y ago
  1) Yes, it's a slight case of hyperbole 2) The majority of the $165 in 1950 was the 1 week hospital stay (and 6 days of nursery care) instead of a 1 day hospital stay. 3) After accounting for the 1 week hospital stay, the biggest remaining cost was for anesthesia. Which is always expensive. Epidurals instead should have driven the costs way down. 4) So that would leave $45 if they left after a modern hospital stay with an epidural. 5) This was in NYC, so it should be higher than average. 6) After adjusting for inflation, that $165 is still more than the out of pocket costs for childbirth today
  - eesmith 4y ago
    You forgot an adjustment. Julia Roberts was born in 1967, not 1950. 1950 was simply the first numbers I could find - and enough to show that $1 is off by at least a couple of orders of magnitude.
    - HWR_14 4y ago
      The numbers are pretty irrelevant. You are focusing on an example (not even one I proposed) instead of the point being made. Not that it's my point. But I do recognize that medical costs have skyrocketed.
      - eesmith 4y ago
        Because I don't think the point you suggested is a likely explanation. Why does the author wish to imply Julia Roberts' parents were so poor they couldn't afford $1? Coretta Scott King paid off the bill as thanks for her parents' kindnesses towards black children in Atlanta. Is $1 - about $30 now - really that big of a thank you in 1967?