4 ms·
That's so weird. As if there was some kind of conspiracy between health care providers and employers. I mean you probably take it for granted that health care i
by Tichy 15y ago
That's so weird. As if there was some kind of conspiracy between health care providers and employers. I mean you probably take it for granted that health care is tied to a job, but that really isn't the case at all. Where I live (Germany) it is organized in a completely different way. If you lose your job, social insurance will keep paying your health insurance.
It's ironic because "your way" actually seems to be taking freedom away from you, yet the US seems to consider a model like the German one to be the ultimate slavery (socialism).
- Natsu 15y agoThey've tried to change the health insurance problem. I'm not sure how much Obamacare will do in that regard, as a practical matter, but we'll eventually find out one way or another, assuming it's not repealed or struck down first.
- alan_cx 15y agoYeah, the thing is the USA is the flip side of the USSR. One was the definition of socialism, the other capitalism. Here in Europe we consider both systems as tools to use, rather than rules for running a state. Part of me wonders if the US obsession with uber capitalism is some sort of historic anti Europe thing, or a way that they remain different and separate. Its US identity. Having booted the Europeans and gained independence, the last thing they want to do is embrace European ideals.
- Tichy 15y agoI don't really understand the logic, because it seems to me that as long as they pay taxes in the US, they are just as "socialist" as, say, Germany with their health insurance. What is the difference if you build roads for the common good or buy health insurance for the common good. Also I don't understand how capitalism makes health care tied to employment. In theory shouldn't there be health insurers who are willing to ensure you just as long as you pay your rates? What do they care if you are employed or not - except perhaps for some statistics like "employed people are less/more healthy on average", which could be factored into the rates.
- bdunbar 15y agoIn theory shouldn't there be health insurers who are willing to ensure you just as long as you pay your rates? There are, in actual fact, insurance companies in the US that will do this. Some make it a business to cater to self-employed folks who don't have company insurance. It's been a while since I thought about this, but (IIRC) the 'private companies pay for insurance' deal got started in World War II, as a perk. Companies could not compete for scarce labor (salary freeze) so they offered basic health insurance to attract workers. From there it just grew. So why do so many of us accept it, when there are free-market alternatives? I think it's the convenience. Take my dental plan at work. For about $10 a month I'm covered for all routine stuff at the dentist. Extraordinary work will cost me a bit off the top, but not _that_ much, for the care I'm getting. Which is pretty much the plan I'd get if I eschewed the work plan and bought one on my own. The convenience is that work has a team of guys who deal with the insurance companies, getting deals, selecting plans, negotiating rates, basically dealing with a lot of hassle so I don't have to. Now, I could get a better rate on my own, and I probably _should_ if I were really worried about being laid-off but .. it's just easier this way. A trade-off. For a lot of us, this is okay: the plans our employers offer are pretty good. For some people, who have sucky employers and rotten plans ... it's sub-optimal.
- campnic 15y agoI think it's the convenience. I think its because employers for large companies get the only reasonable health care rates in the country. If you work for a large employer and you have a way as an individual to get comparative coverage for the same cost ignoring any pre-existing conditions, I'd love to hear it.
- Tichy 15y agoHm, let me guess: does it work because the employer pools all of his employees, and the insurance can account for that? Like one employee gets seriously ill, but 10 stay healthy, so the costs average out? I think private insurance here in Germany just forms arbitrary pools of people, but the don't just insure anybody. If you have some risk indicators, they won't insure you. Maybe the employers in the US simply have a good bargaining chip, they can say "if you insure our one risky employee, you'll also get to insure our other ten non-risky employees".
- eli_gottlieb 15y agoWhite America developed out of freehold farming, whereas Europe developed out of a feudal peasant-farming class that was later enclosed off its land and forced into wage-labor. Now, moves similar to enclosure were pulled in the US, but the culture developed around "self-reliance" and what you might call Yeoman Capitalism. These people hold a strong, bizarrely strong, idea that any time you like you can quit your job and go homestead some open land, so you're Free. Minority populations tend to be significantly more left-wing for a reason. We were usually discriminated against in the public or private sphere, or even just allowed into the country as exploited labor (Asians, blacks). We have no thoughts of homesteading the Midwest meaning Freedom; we think worker ownership or unionization means Freedom.
- Nick_C 15y agoThanks for this insightful post. As an outsider, I wondered how the US associated itself so strongly with "freedom".