4 ms·
What you've described is worse than flat wages. The business-owner class benefits from the health system, because the business-owners are the gatekeepers of he
by Buttons840 1y ago
What you've described is worse than flat wages.
The business-owner class benefits from the health system, because the business-owners are the gatekeepers of healthcare (typically, people get healthcare only through their employer). The worker class is less likely to benefit from the free part of the "free market" because their healthcare is tied to their employer; it's just harder to do anything except work a typical 9-to-5 for the benefit of a business-owner.
The healthcare industry also benefits because they get to suck up a large portion of the GDP; trillions of dollars.
So wages aren't only flat, but the wage growth that should have happened instead went into a corrupt system. Wages aren't honestly flat because of natural market forces, they are corruptly flat.
- mbrumlow 1y ago> The business-owner class benefits from the health system, That is a new argument, coming from health care is a right and good for society? It’s kinda crazy you want to dismiss this simply because it benefits some group of people you don’t like. In any se your argument is this is worse. And I argue this is good, fair and meritocratic , and sustainable. While the USA has wealth, you can simply expand your idea beyond the walked garden of a single country and to the world stage. There is no way with today’s tech and cost of labor could we ever give free health care to everybody. World wide there are far more people who exist, than people who exist and contribute back to society. The dream of unlimited free healthcare can only be archived once > 90% of humans are producing more than they consume, which war are no where near even in the richest of rich, the USA.
- archagon 1y agoHow am I supposed to start a small business if I’m dependent on my big corpo job for healthcare? Without a robust social safety net, only the rich and well-connected can afford to take economic risks. Eventually, this just results in a flat-out oligarchy.
- username135 1y agoyou marry someone rich enough to allow you that freedom /s
- jeezfrk 1y agoThat seems utterly disingenuous as nearly every single other advanced economy IN THE WORLD has near free health care.
- normalaccess 1y agoThey have it because they don't spend on defense like the USA does. The US taxpayer is the world's golden goose and by means of things like NATO are subsidizing the European socialist healthcare systems. If the USA cut it's funding in these lines Europe would be back to square one in a very shot time.
- Buttons840 1y agoThe US pays more per person for healthcare than any other nation. This would be true if we doubled defense spending, or if we cut defense spending to zero.
- ryandrake 1y agoThis just seems like the USA's poor spending choices. We could easily have a similar healthcare system as the rest of the developed world, if we chose not to buy all those bombers and aircraft carriers.
- Lalo-ATX 1y ago> They have it because they don't spend on defense like the USA does. That doesn't feel right to me. In the most recent year with data, as a percentage of gdp: party healthcare military eu 10.95% 1.56% usa 17.36% 3.45% stark difference, but "the only reason eu has socialized healthcare is because of their low military spending" just doesn't reconcile in my mind to the above numbers [source data](https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/euu/european-union/military-spending-defense-budget https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/countries/euu/eur...)
- solumunus 1y agoPure cope.
- 1y ago