3 ms·

Good input. I expect the URSSAF number does not include additional compulsory costs like healthcare ("mutuelle santé", though in France this will be much less t

Good input. I expect the URSSAF number does not include additional compulsory costs like healthcare ("mutuelle santé", though in France this will be much less than 10k a year. So total may depend on how exactly it is calculated.

falcor84 1y ago
I've never actually lived in France and would appreciate a bit of detail on that. I had thought that France has full public healthcare, but trying to google this now, I'm getting conflicting details about people having to get that mutuelle and possibly additional top-ups. What is covered by the state? What is required/expected from the employer? And what if anything does an individual need to pay on top of that? I mean, I have sympathy for the idea of everyone having full access to public healthcare regardless of financial situation, but don't quite understand a system where you both pay massive taxes, and then have to still pay extra; so the people who need it the most would still be left untreated?
- rkomorn 1y ago
  Mutual (or private) insurance fills gaps like: - a procedure is considered elective under the public insurance coverage - public coverage only provides partial reimbursement and the insurance covers the difference In general, no one is left untreated for "real" (YMMV) health issues and private coverage is more of a luxury perk on top of public healthcare. Edit: public healthcare is definitely not a "free for all everything is covered" bonanza, which I think most people find logical. That said, one can always argue that some things aren't covered that should (or vice versa if you're the government and trying to cut costs).
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    Well, I mentioned private coverage specifically because it is mandatory since 2016: All private employers must offer it, employees have to take it, and cost is split.
    - rkomorn 1y ago
      Oh, that part. (political opinion disclaimer) IMO, that part's basically just "cost-saving" misdirection/smoke screen (eg it's not "public spending" but we're all spending it). I think that lines up with your question about "why both taxes and having to have private on top". But in general, "people going untreated" is not much of a concern even if, for example, they don't work and don't private insurance.
      - rkomorn 1y ago
        Also worth noting, though, that the private insurance premiums in France are nothing like in the US (for example), not least because they don't have to cover anywhere near as much.

falcor84 1y ago

I've never actually lived in France and would appreciate a bit of detail on that. I had thought that France has full public healthcare, but trying to google this now, I'm getting conflicting details about people having to get that mutuelle and possibly additional top-ups. What is covered by the state? What is required/expected from the employer? And what if anything does an individual need to pay on top of that? I mean, I have sympathy for the idea of everyone having full access to public healthcare regardless of financial situation, but don't quite understand a system where you both pay massive taxes, and then have to still pay extra; so the people who need it the most would still be left untreated?

rkomorn 1y ago
Mutual (or private) insurance fills gaps like: - a procedure is considered elective under the public insurance coverage - public coverage only provides partial reimbursement and the insurance covers the difference In general, no one is left untreated for "real" (YMMV) health issues and private coverage is more of a luxury perk on top of public healthcare. Edit: public healthcare is definitely not a "free for all everything is covered" bonanza, which I think most people find logical. That said, one can always argue that some things aren't covered that should (or vice versa if you're the government and trying to cut costs).
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  Well, I mentioned private coverage specifically because it is mandatory since 2016: All private employers must offer it, employees have to take it, and cost is split.
  - rkomorn 1y ago
    Oh, that part. (political opinion disclaimer) IMO, that part's basically just "cost-saving" misdirection/smoke screen (eg it's not "public spending" but we're all spending it). I think that lines up with your question about "why both taxes and having to have private on top". But in general, "people going untreated" is not much of a concern even if, for example, they don't work and don't private insurance.
    - rkomorn 1y ago
      Also worth noting, though, that the private insurance premiums in France are nothing like in the US (for example), not least because they don't have to cover anywhere near as much.