5 ms·

> The only system which will work in the US is one in which the ultra wealthy have an incentive to provide funding to the public system, and that seems like you

by cj 11mo ago

> The only system which will work in the US is one in which the ultra wealthy have an incentive to provide funding to the public system, and that seems like you’d need to force them to be on the public system too. In my state, I pay $15k/year in school taxes, yet I have no children. I pay $1000/year in property taxes to support my city's library, yet I don't have a library card. People are taxed for lots of things they don't actually benefit from. I don't think we would need to force rich people to use the plans. If they want to buy medical services from private doctors, sure we can let them. The issue then becomes more about allocation of resources (how many doctors are available to be seen on the public system vs. only available to self-pay customers) rather than the issue being about how to collect taxes.

teachrdan 11mo ago
This may be small potatoes, but I've heard it said that people like you benefit "by not living in a state full of dumbasses." There's definitely an indirect benefit from these payments.
- cj 11mo ago
  Exactly, same with health insurance! I'm less likely to get sick if everyone around me has access to doctors when they get sick. (I personally don't mind subsidizing my library + local school district... good schools and libraries are good for the community)
  - smileysteve 11mo ago
    Not only are you less likely to get sick, You're less likely to see sick people. Healthy people are more productive (you'll have better businesses) Healthy people are nicer (especially if we consider mental health, and then violence) Healthy people use the ER less.
    - nradov 11mo ago
      Be careful what you wish for. Having health insurance doesn't equate to having access to care. Especially in the mental health space, fewer and fewer providers will even accept new patients on government-sponsored health plans due to low rates. https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/medicaid-insurers-doctor-networks-appointments-72f9c11f https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/medicaid-insurers-doct...
  - peterangular 11mo ago
    > (I personally don't mind subsidizing my library + local school district... good schools and libraries are good for the community) Just sharing random coffee break thoughts... it always blows my mind is how many people _don't_ think like this. When base conditions improve for society, the conditions improve for _everyone_ regardless if they directly benefit you. I'm also in the boat where I don't have kids, but I'd also like to live in a place that has educated people - so schools make perfect sense to me. Heck, even if I didn't benefit from it, providing children education is just the gosh-darn right thing to do.
    - themanmaran 11mo ago
      > how many people _don't_ think like this It's just lack of trust. It's not that people want a worse community, it's that they have a hard time believing that taking extra money from their paycheck will create a better community. Part of it is real; seeing massive amounts of state/local government waste and corruption makes it feel safer to keep your extra dollars instead of giving them away. Part of it is difficulty evaluating timelines; more tax dollars for a better elementary school to be built in 3 years and to yield higher educated people 18 years from now it a lot to bet on.
    - mef 11mo ago
      IMO it's because there's both benefit and waste/corruption in these kinds of social benefit structures. some people choose to only see one or the other: "these benefit everyone including those who don't use them directly! how could you be against it?" "this money that I'm having to pay is either overpaid to corrupt vendors, or just straight wasted, why would we ever want to increase how much we're paying into this system?" in reality you can't have one without the other. it's up to each person to decide whether they can take the bad with the good
    - Projectiboga 11mo ago
      Yes, universal health will start saving money even during the first transition year. We spend almost 1/3 or more of those total health dollars on billing administration. That amount surpasses the uninsured number. And the reality is if we can get medical care during the daytime, eventually emergency rooms might get less hectic. My hope is that more days than not ER personell have to pass the time like at a Firehouse.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
- charcircuit 11mo ago
  That would require that the more tax money the school system gets the smarter the students will be. Every time I see a bill for increasing school taxes their justification is not for improving education quality, but for some other pet project they want to do.
0ckpuppet 11mo ago
you can either build good schools or good jails, so contributing to your schools is contributing to your town infrastructure.
- cwmoore 11mo ago
  There are no good jails.
  - sharts 11mo ago
    School is jail
    - cwmoore 11mo ago
      So is some healthcare.
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]
jmpman 11mo ago
In my state, the politicians attempt to fund the schools the least amount possible. Healthcare will fare no better.

by cj 11mo ago

teachrdan 11mo ago

This may be small potatoes, but I've heard it said that people like you benefit "by not living in a state full of dumbasses." There's definitely an indirect benefit from these payments.

cj 11mo ago
Exactly, same with health insurance! I'm less likely to get sick if everyone around me has access to doctors when they get sick. (I personally don't mind subsidizing my library + local school district... good schools and libraries are good for the community)
- smileysteve 11mo ago
  Not only are you less likely to get sick, You're less likely to see sick people. Healthy people are more productive (you'll have better businesses) Healthy people are nicer (especially if we consider mental health, and then violence) Healthy people use the ER less.
  - nradov 11mo ago
    Be careful what you wish for. Having health insurance doesn't equate to having access to care. Especially in the mental health space, fewer and fewer providers will even accept new patients on government-sponsored health plans due to low rates. https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/medicaid-insurers-doctor-networks-appointments-72f9c11f https://www.wsj.com/health/healthcare/medicaid-insurers-doct...
- peterangular 11mo ago
  > (I personally don't mind subsidizing my library + local school district... good schools and libraries are good for the community) Just sharing random coffee break thoughts... it always blows my mind is how many people _don't_ think like this. When base conditions improve for society, the conditions improve for _everyone_ regardless if they directly benefit you. I'm also in the boat where I don't have kids, but I'd also like to live in a place that has educated people - so schools make perfect sense to me. Heck, even if I didn't benefit from it, providing children education is just the gosh-darn right thing to do.
  - themanmaran 11mo ago
    > how many people _don't_ think like this It's just lack of trust. It's not that people want a worse community, it's that they have a hard time believing that taking extra money from their paycheck will create a better community. Part of it is real; seeing massive amounts of state/local government waste and corruption makes it feel safer to keep your extra dollars instead of giving them away. Part of it is difficulty evaluating timelines; more tax dollars for a better elementary school to be built in 3 years and to yield higher educated people 18 years from now it a lot to bet on.
  - mef 11mo ago
    IMO it's because there's both benefit and waste/corruption in these kinds of social benefit structures. some people choose to only see one or the other: "these benefit everyone including those who don't use them directly! how could you be against it?" "this money that I'm having to pay is either overpaid to corrupt vendors, or just straight wasted, why would we ever want to increase how much we're paying into this system?" in reality you can't have one without the other. it's up to each person to decide whether they can take the bad with the good
  - Projectiboga 11mo ago
    Yes, universal health will start saving money even during the first transition year. We spend almost 1/3 or more of those total health dollars on billing administration. That amount surpasses the uninsured number. And the reality is if we can get medical care during the daytime, eventually emergency rooms might get less hectic. My hope is that more days than not ER personell have to pass the time like at a Firehouse.
- deleted 11mo ago
  [deleted]
charcircuit 11mo ago
That would require that the more tax money the school system gets the smarter the students will be. Every time I see a bill for increasing school taxes their justification is not for improving education quality, but for some other pet project they want to do.

0ckpuppet 11mo ago

you can either build good schools or good jails, so contributing to your schools is contributing to your town infrastructure.

cwmoore 11mo ago
There are no good jails.
- sharts 11mo ago
  School is jail
  - cwmoore 11mo ago
    So is some healthcare.

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]

jmpman 11mo ago

In my state, the politicians attempt to fund the schools the least amount possible. Healthcare will fare no better.