5 ms·

I think that might be worse than just having the high price. Such a kafka-esque systems just to get medicine.

by Insanity 11mo ago

timeon 11mo ago
Probably not just medicine. I heard that prices in US shops are different than final price at the counter.
averageRoyalty 11mo ago
Absolutely. I'd prefer to go to the pharmacy and just pay my $20 and go.
- dotancohen 11mo ago
  Do you prefer sunny (Greece) or snowy (Norway)? You can just pay your $20 and go. It is an option.
  - actionfromafar 11mo ago
    I prefer to pay thousands in tariffs and/or private companies, thank you very much. I'm not a communist.
    - Muromec 11mo ago
      Sir, your visa application is denied anyways.
      - actionfromafar 11mo ago
        Yes Sir Mr President Sir.
  - averageRoyalty 11mo ago
    I'm happy in both (Australia). But thanks!
- rootusrootus 11mo ago
  That's usually how it works for me in the US. I go in to the pharmacy, and at least half the time they say 'no cost' and hand me my medication. Sometimes I pay a $25 copay. And if I get an expensive drug from Eli Lilly (e.g. Zepbound) then Eli Lilly pays Walgreens up to $1950/year on my behalf and I never even know about it. The only way I figured it out myself was trying to figure out why my insurance said they paid X, and I paid Y, but I had actually only paid $25. Took a trip onto a Zepbound subreddit to learn about the backdoor payment thing. "Savings card" but not actually a card.
xnorswap 11mo ago
The best thing about universal healthcare isn't how much money I may or may not have to pay, it's that I literally don't once have to think about a bill or filling out a form to avoid paying too much. I wouldn't care if I ended up paying more in tax than I would in an insurance model. The benefit is being able to 100% focus on my health instead of navigating a system to try to reduce what I'm paying. When you're diagnosed with an illness, that's a huge peace of mind.
- ChrisMarshallNY 11mo ago
  [flagged]
  - wang_li 11mo ago
    The US has a massively progressive tax system. On a net tax basis about 50% of the country pays nothing. Sure, they pay sales tax and employment taxes, but they also receive some mix of earned income tax credits, child tax credits, snap, medicaid, housing, etc. There is no real way for the US to have a single payer tax system without more people actually becoming net tax payers.
    - sgerenser 11mo ago
      Yeah this is something people in favor of single payer healthcare in the U.S. don’t want to acknowledge. In most other countries, the middle 50% of taxpayers pay a much higher percentage of their income than in the U.S. Everyone somehow thinks we can make it work just by raising taxes on “the rich” (where that is usually defined as anyone making more money than them). But if it was that easy, then why does Canada and most European countries have so much higher taxes on the middle class? Now I’m not inherently against increasing taxes (for all) if it gave us a much better healthcare system, but you have to be intellectually honest about who would have to pay those higher taxes. It’s not just Elon Musk.
      - yoyohello13 11mo ago
        I'm curious what the actual number is. I have health insurance through my work and I pay over $1,500 a month for that (and still have out of pocket costs). That's $18,000 a year. That's a substantial percentage of my income which essentially is just a tax going to the insurance company instead of the government. Now if it cost a couple thousand more a year and I didn't have to worry about getting claims denied for random reasons, I'd take that deal. If it's $5,000-10,000 more a year? Then I'd have qualms.
CTDOCodebases 11mo ago
It's the efficiency of capitalism at work. It's more efficient to allocate capital to systems and processes that delay or stop you claiming on your insurance than it is to actually pay out a genuine claim.
- chii 11mo ago
  This has nothing to do with capitalism, and everything to do with regulatory capture and archaic rules established in a bygone era for a purpose that has since been outlived.

I think that might be worse than just having the high price. Such a kafka-esque systems just to get medicine.

timeon 11mo ago

Probably not just medicine. I heard that prices in US shops are different than final price at the counter.

averageRoyalty 11mo ago

Absolutely. I'd prefer to go to the pharmacy and just pay my $20 and go.

dotancohen 11mo ago
Do you prefer sunny (Greece) or snowy (Norway)? You can just pay your $20 and go. It is an option.
- actionfromafar 11mo ago
  I prefer to pay thousands in tariffs and/or private companies, thank you very much. I'm not a communist.
  - Muromec 11mo ago
    Sir, your visa application is denied anyways.
    - actionfromafar 11mo ago
      Yes Sir Mr President Sir.
- averageRoyalty 11mo ago
  I'm happy in both (Australia). But thanks!
rootusrootus 11mo ago
That's usually how it works for me in the US. I go in to the pharmacy, and at least half the time they say 'no cost' and hand me my medication. Sometimes I pay a $25 copay. And if I get an expensive drug from Eli Lilly (e.g. Zepbound) then Eli Lilly pays Walgreens up to $1950/year on my behalf and I never even know about it. The only way I figured it out myself was trying to figure out why my insurance said they paid X, and I paid Y, but I had actually only paid $25. Took a trip onto a Zepbound subreddit to learn about the backdoor payment thing. "Savings card" but not actually a card.

xnorswap 11mo ago

The best thing about universal healthcare isn't how much money I may or may not have to pay, it's that I literally don't once have to think about a bill or filling out a form to avoid paying too much. I wouldn't care if I ended up paying more in tax than I would in an insurance model. The benefit is being able to 100% focus on my health instead of navigating a system to try to reduce what I'm paying. When you're diagnosed with an illness, that's a huge peace of mind.

ChrisMarshallNY 11mo ago
[flagged]
- wang_li 11mo ago
  The US has a massively progressive tax system. On a net tax basis about 50% of the country pays nothing. Sure, they pay sales tax and employment taxes, but they also receive some mix of earned income tax credits, child tax credits, snap, medicaid, housing, etc. There is no real way for the US to have a single payer tax system without more people actually becoming net tax payers.
  - sgerenser 11mo ago
    Yeah this is something people in favor of single payer healthcare in the U.S. don’t want to acknowledge. In most other countries, the middle 50% of taxpayers pay a much higher percentage of their income than in the U.S. Everyone somehow thinks we can make it work just by raising taxes on “the rich” (where that is usually defined as anyone making more money than them). But if it was that easy, then why does Canada and most European countries have so much higher taxes on the middle class? Now I’m not inherently against increasing taxes (for all) if it gave us a much better healthcare system, but you have to be intellectually honest about who would have to pay those higher taxes. It’s not just Elon Musk.
    - yoyohello13 11mo ago
      I'm curious what the actual number is. I have health insurance through my work and I pay over $1,500 a month for that (and still have out of pocket costs). That's $18,000 a year. That's a substantial percentage of my income which essentially is just a tax going to the insurance company instead of the government. Now if it cost a couple thousand more a year and I didn't have to worry about getting claims denied for random reasons, I'd take that deal. If it's $5,000-10,000 more a year? Then I'd have qualms.

CTDOCodebases 11mo ago

It's the efficiency of capitalism at work. It's more efficient to allocate capital to systems and processes that delay or stop you claiming on your insurance than it is to actually pay out a genuine claim.

chii 11mo ago
This has nothing to do with capitalism, and everything to do with regulatory capture and archaic rules established in a bygone era for a purpose that has since been outlived.