5 ms·

Reminds me how GoFundMe is effectively a healthcare insurance that's based on donations. https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ceo/ https://

Reminds me how GoFundMe is effectively a healthcare insurance that's based on donations. https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ceo/ https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ce...

rbanffy 2y ago
If you are popular enough, you might live. If you are not, oh well…
- EGreg 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - gjsman-1000 2y ago
    [flagged]
    - ceejayoz 2y ago
      > Criticizing a system built mostly on government handouts (by definition a socialist or communist structure) as being a late-stage capitalism problem shows you’ve got no clue what these terms actually mean. That's just the capitalists outright purchasing the legislators, so Walmart can employ people at minimum wage and let the taxpayers foot the bill for their healthcare and food stamps.
      - gjsman-1000 2y ago
        In that case, we’re not in a capitalist system at all, but a capitalist-socialist hybrid. Arguably, we’ve been in the hybrid since the New Deal, and it seems to have inherited the same socialism issues China is also grappling with.
        vasco 2y ago
        Social democracy is the term that is usually used.
      - gruez 2y ago
        >so Walmart can employ people at minimum wage and let the taxpayers foot the bill for their healthcare and food stamps. Do those people magically start needing food and healthcare once they're employed by walmart? Why is it suddenly walmarts problem the moment they become a walmart employee? Would anyone stakeholder in this situation (the employees, society, walmart) be better off if the employee was no longer employed?
        anotherhue 2y ago
        I think the argument is that their labour is being subsidised which amounts to a benefit for BigSam. If we had a USB or negative income tax system then that benefit would be clearly spread across the whole population evenly but instead the stamp system has many rules and restrictions that allow Walmart to strategically benefit by both positioning the role at just the right amount to qualify for the benefit (but no more) and frustratingly by being the vendor honouring the stamps.
        gruez 2y ago
        >If we had a USB or negative income tax system then that benefit would be clearly spread across the whole population evenly But we do? The EITC is basically a negative income tax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit >I think the argument is that their labour is being subsidised which amounts to a benefit for BigSam. Ironically negative income taxes are closer to a labor "subsidy", than food stamps, because they're contingent on income (ie. labor), unlike food stamps which don't give you more money if you make more.
    - plagiarist 2y ago
      Government assistance is neither socialism nor communism. You do not understand what those terms mean. Additionally, most of the government handouts we see are going to large corporations or the military.
    - manishader 2y ago
      Late stage capitalism is just economics and philosophy for unlearned people who haven't read much or had much education in economics or philosophy. Imagine believing in historicism in 2024. It is even dumber than believing in witchcraft or horoscopes.
    - rbanffy 2y ago
      > Criticizing a system built mostly on government handouts This was not what I was criticising. It was about turning someone’s life into entertainment and, in this extreme GoFundMe example, the right to life becoming a function of how entertaining one is. > (by definition a socialist or communist structure) Socialism and communism are not about government handouts. Both are about controlling the means of production (industries, farms) by the people (implying democratic representation). You might correctly argue that the Soviet Union was not a shining beacon of how to implement it, and this is what details almost every discussion on the subject.
      - leosanchez 2y ago
        > You might correctly argue that the Soviet Union was not a shining beacon of how to implement it India as implemented Socialism btw. Which lead to economic crisis[0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Indian_economic_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Indian_economic_crisis
        sofixa 2y ago
        There isn't any mention of socialism, or anything related to it in your link. It sounds like a classic balance of payments issue (importing too much compared to exports/tourism/other revenues) being hit with an exploding in price critical import (oil). Sri Lanka had the same issues just a few years back, was it "socialism" too?
        leosanchez 2y ago
        India until 1991 was very socialist. After 1991 they implemented reforms to reduce state controls. This [0] explains a bit better [0] https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/india-and-the-tragedy-of-socialism https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/india-and-the-tragedy-of-soci...
        sofixa 2y ago
        What a shittily written article, staining the Adam Smith name. Nationalising a bunch of critical industries isn't "socialism" and the article utterly fails to explain how it is or why it's related. Historical UK, and modern France, Russia, UAE, Saudi Arabia also had multiple crucial industries which were fully nationally owned. Were they socialist too?
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
grecy 2y ago
One third of all donations on GoFundMe are for medical expenses. [1] the very vast majority of that must be Americans. I’m staggered how many Americans are steadfastly against socialized healthcare for all, but immediately turn to GoFundMe in desperation when their insurance tells them to take a hike. I can’t help thinking “just do that for everyone” [1] https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ceo/ https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ce...
- nothercastle 2y ago
  If you have a non emergency procedure and you are short of cash it seems like medical tourism would be a better choice
  - grecy 2y ago
    It seems like Americans have a knack for coming up with the most convoluted ways of accessing healthcare that are still expensive and inconvenient. Your idea still require paying out of pocket, requires taking unpaid time off work, flights, relying on the healthcare system of a foreign country and more. That is the worst possible "healthcare" situation I can imagine. Dozens of countries have shown you pay a lot less and get much better outcomes [1] when you just provide healthcare to everyone all the time, the same way high school, roads and street lights are provided. Why wouldn't you want that? Why on earth would you think flying to some foreign country is a better solution? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_vs_heal...
    - nothercastle 2y ago
      I’m not saying it’s a great thing but when things are messed up you need a work around. That’s the work around, the money from go fund me is probably not enough the health care is that unaffordable
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Americans have a knack for coming up with the most convoluted ways of accessing healthcare Medical tourism is alive and well even within Europe [1]. And an entire genre of concierge medicine in America caters to rich Europeans (alongside rich Middle Easterners and Asians). [1] https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/visegrad-countries-attractive-affordable https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/visegrad-cou...
creole_wither 2y ago
You mean https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/ https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/

rbanffy 2y ago

If you are popular enough, you might live. If you are not, oh well…

EGreg 2y ago
[flagged]
- gjsman-1000 2y ago
  [flagged]
  - ceejayoz 2y ago
    > Criticizing a system built mostly on government handouts (by definition a socialist or communist structure) as being a late-stage capitalism problem shows you’ve got no clue what these terms actually mean. That's just the capitalists outright purchasing the legislators, so Walmart can employ people at minimum wage and let the taxpayers foot the bill for their healthcare and food stamps.
    - gjsman-1000 2y ago
      In that case, we’re not in a capitalist system at all, but a capitalist-socialist hybrid. Arguably, we’ve been in the hybrid since the New Deal, and it seems to have inherited the same socialism issues China is also grappling with.
      - vasco 2y ago
        Social democracy is the term that is usually used.
    - gruez 2y ago
      >so Walmart can employ people at minimum wage and let the taxpayers foot the bill for their healthcare and food stamps. Do those people magically start needing food and healthcare once they're employed by walmart? Why is it suddenly walmarts problem the moment they become a walmart employee? Would anyone stakeholder in this situation (the employees, society, walmart) be better off if the employee was no longer employed?
      - anotherhue 2y ago
        I think the argument is that their labour is being subsidised which amounts to a benefit for BigSam. If we had a USB or negative income tax system then that benefit would be clearly spread across the whole population evenly but instead the stamp system has many rules and restrictions that allow Walmart to strategically benefit by both positioning the role at just the right amount to qualify for the benefit (but no more) and frustratingly by being the vendor honouring the stamps.
        gruez 2y ago
        >If we had a USB or negative income tax system then that benefit would be clearly spread across the whole population evenly But we do? The EITC is basically a negative income tax. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earned_income_tax_credit >I think the argument is that their labour is being subsidised which amounts to a benefit for BigSam. Ironically negative income taxes are closer to a labor "subsidy", than food stamps, because they're contingent on income (ie. labor), unlike food stamps which don't give you more money if you make more.
  - plagiarist 2y ago
    Government assistance is neither socialism nor communism. You do not understand what those terms mean. Additionally, most of the government handouts we see are going to large corporations or the military.
  - manishader 2y ago
    Late stage capitalism is just economics and philosophy for unlearned people who haven't read much or had much education in economics or philosophy. Imagine believing in historicism in 2024. It is even dumber than believing in witchcraft or horoscopes.
  - rbanffy 2y ago
    > Criticizing a system built mostly on government handouts This was not what I was criticising. It was about turning someone’s life into entertainment and, in this extreme GoFundMe example, the right to life becoming a function of how entertaining one is. > (by definition a socialist or communist structure) Socialism and communism are not about government handouts. Both are about controlling the means of production (industries, farms) by the people (implying democratic representation). You might correctly argue that the Soviet Union was not a shining beacon of how to implement it, and this is what details almost every discussion on the subject.
    - leosanchez 2y ago
      > You might correctly argue that the Soviet Union was not a shining beacon of how to implement it India as implemented Socialism btw. Which lead to economic crisis[0] 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Indian_economic_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_Indian_economic_crisis
      - sofixa 2y ago
        There isn't any mention of socialism, or anything related to it in your link. It sounds like a classic balance of payments issue (importing too much compared to exports/tourism/other revenues) being hit with an exploding in price critical import (oil). Sri Lanka had the same issues just a few years back, was it "socialism" too?
        leosanchez 2y ago
        India until 1991 was very socialist. After 1991 they implemented reforms to reduce state controls. This [0] explains a bit better [0] https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/india-and-the-tragedy-of-socialism https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/india-and-the-tragedy-of-soci...
        sofixa 2y ago
        What a shittily written article, staining the Adam Smith name. Nationalising a bunch of critical industries isn't "socialism" and the article utterly fails to explain how it is or why it's related. Historical UK, and modern France, Russia, UAE, Saudi Arabia also had multiple crucial industries which were fully nationally owned. Were they socialist too?
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

grecy 2y ago

One third of all donations on GoFundMe are for medical expenses. [1] the very vast majority of that must be Americans. I’m staggered how many Americans are steadfastly against socialized healthcare for all, but immediately turn to GoFundMe in desperation when their insurance tells them to take a hike. I can’t help thinking “just do that for everyone” [1] https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ceo/ https://time.com/5516037/gofundme-medical-bills-one-third-ce...

nothercastle 2y ago
If you have a non emergency procedure and you are short of cash it seems like medical tourism would be a better choice
- grecy 2y ago
  It seems like Americans have a knack for coming up with the most convoluted ways of accessing healthcare that are still expensive and inconvenient. Your idea still require paying out of pocket, requires taking unpaid time off work, flights, relying on the healthcare system of a foreign country and more. That is the worst possible "healthcare" situation I can imagine. Dozens of countries have shown you pay a lot less and get much better outcomes [1] when you just provide healthcare to everyone all the time, the same way high school, roads and street lights are provided. Why wouldn't you want that? Why on earth would you think flying to some foreign country is a better solution? [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_vs_healthcare_spending.jpg https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Life_expectancy_vs_heal...
  - nothercastle 2y ago
    I’m not saying it’s a great thing but when things are messed up you need a work around. That’s the work around, the money from go fund me is probably not enough the health care is that unaffordable
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > Americans have a knack for coming up with the most convoluted ways of accessing healthcare Medical tourism is alive and well even within Europe [1]. And an entire genre of concierge medicine in America caters to rich Europeans (alongside rich Middle Easterners and Asians). [1] https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/visegrad-countries-attractive-affordable https://www.magazine.medicaltourism.com/article/visegrad-cou...

creole_wither 2y ago

You mean https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/ https://www.joincrowdhealth.com/