7 ms·
Suicide is Cheaper
- meaty 14y agoThis is one of the fortunate things about living in the UK. I live in a crappy part of London but the hospital is good and 100% included in my tax. Through my wife's 2x emergency c-sections, a broken arm, my physically disabled daughter, an eye socket infection thanks to a mosquito bite, an umbillical hernia operation and an ingrown toe nail, its been perfect and cost no excess, insurance begging or legal intervention. I'm not afraid to call an ambulance in case it costs money.
- dmix 14y agoI consider myself a libertarian and I still support public health insurance. I grew up in Canada and spent time living in the states. I don't agree with most government expenditure, but I have no problem paying taxes for healthcare. There are much more wasteful things governments spend our money on.
- paulgb 14y agoI have a similar political mindset, but I'm afraid to apply the label "libertarian" to myself because it conjures images of Rand-following Objectivists who believe tax is theft and externalities don't exist. I wish there were another name for that quadrant of the political compass that had less connotations.
- antidoh 14y agoMy libertarian cube mate calls me a progressive libertarian. Which I believe describes me literally, although the term has all the feel of that other marketing term, "compassionate conservatism." Still, I think it's pretty close, as a literal term.
- ryanwaggoner 14y agoNeoliberal? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-classical_liberalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-classical_liberalism
- ericingram 14y agoI consider myself a Libertarian also. The problem with government funded health care is what you can't see. True market based competition leads to lower prices and greater innovation in all observable areas over time. That would mean more access for more people in the case of health care, but instead with deep government intrusion for decades, we have seen ever increasing prices and sluggish innovation. Libertarian philosophy has a lot to do with a belief in sound market principles. Why should all that go out the window for health care? The problems facing health care today, in my view, are largely a result of the free market being trampled on. People who don't really understand market principles will tell you the exact opposite, that health care has been nothing but a free for all, totally unregulated. Do you believe that? It sounds like you might generally agree with libertarian ideas and some research on scholars like F.A. Hayek and Ludwig von Mises might help focus your libertarian perspective.
- tzs 14y agoHayek doesn't fit in well with most Libertarians nowadays. From his "The Road to Serfdom": There is no reason why, in a society which has reached the general level of wealth ours has, the first kind of security should not be guaranteed to all without endangering general freedom; that is: some minimum of food, shelter and clothing, sufficient to preserve health. Nor is there any reason why the state should not help to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance in providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision. and Where, as in the case of sickness and accident, neither the desire to avoid such calamities nor the efforts to overcome their consequences are as a rule weakened by the provision of assistance – where, in short, we deal with genuinely insurable risks – the case for the state’s helping to organize a comprehensive system of social insurance is very strong. There are many points of detail where those wishing to preserve the competitive system and those wishing to super-cede it by something different will disagree on the details of such schemes; and it is possible under the name of social insurance to introduce measures which tend to make competition more or less ineffective. But there is no incompatability in principle between the state’s providing greater security in this way and the preservation of individual freedom. To the same category belongs also the increase of security through the state’s rendering assistance to the victims of such ‘acts of God’ as earthquakes and floods. Wherever communal action can mitigate disasters against which the individual can neither attempt to guard himself nor make provision for the consequences, such communal action should undoubtedly be taken. Post that in many Libertarian forums nowadays and you'll be called a leftist or statist.
- davidw 14y agoArticles about politics should probably be left to other sites.
- shinratdr 14y agoIf you see any, be sure to alert the community. I was all caught up in this touching article about how disgustingly backwards any non-universal healthcare system is. Sorry, but providing basic free healthcare is no more a political issue than adopting the metric system or providing clean drinking water. Just because there are a handful of countries that still try to justify their backwards ridiculousness under the thin veneer of "politics", much like those who try to take civil rights away, doesn't mean this isn't a settled issue for 99% of the world and fair game to discuss. I would love to see the responses to a Muslim extremist who pops into the comments on an article about stoning an adulterer to death to mention that "we should probably be avoiding politics". Something tells me other commenters would tear his head off, and rightfully so. Just because you can find a place that's still ridiculous enough to try and defend the practice doesn't instantly make it an untouchable political issue.
- davidw 14y agoOther issues that are way more important than hacking and startups: * Wars. * Human rights. * The fact that people die of hunger. And yet, those are all not really on-topic for this site either. It would be extremely easy to crowd out all the 'on topic' stories with things that are vastly more important "in the grand scheme of things", yet it would ruin the nature of this site. Articles about stoning women are also, IMO, off topic, so the problem with the 'muslim extremist' simply shouldn't happen. (BTW, I much prefer the health care situation here in Italy than in my native US, but discussing it is just not what this site is about.)
- shinratdr 14y agoIf you find an article that "gratifies one's intellectual curiosity" on those topics then please submit them. Don't conflate HN with only startup news. It has never had that restriction, it's more of a primary focus. HN is not /r/StartUps. There are no hard rules here on specific content, only community consensus via voting and occasional hands-on moderation.
- DanBC 14y ago> Debt collectors can't legally go after anyone but spouses (and in some states not even that) in a case like this, unless it was the kids/grandkids that signed the hospital admissions. This does not stop unscrupulous debt collection agencies from trying however, and many people do not understand their legal rights. (Also, families can be put in the position of supporting the person who is trying to pay the debt, which is a whole other ball of wax.) In England the debts belong to the debtor. When they die their estate pays any debts. If the estate has no money then the creditors don't get paid.
- Dylan16807 14y agoAre you implying a difference? If so, what. Is the person signing the admissions not the debtor?
- kennywinker 14y agoOP says debt collectors can go after the spouse. DanBC is perhaps implying a difference there?
- tsotha 14y agoThey can go after the spouse because in most states (maybe all of them) your debts are your spouses debts and vice versa. I knew a guy in California that was gritting his teeth the entire six month waiting period for a divorce because his soon-to-be ex was maxing out her credit cards, getting more credit cards and maxing those too. Unfortunately for her the rules change a little once you file for a divorce even if it isn't final.
- DanBC 14y agoCreditors can't go after the spouse. They can go to the executors of the will and try to get money from the estate.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- pragone 14y agoI remember one call I did in the middle of winter a few years ago - cardiac arrest, on the side of the road. Got there and the guy was frozen and long dead. He was across the street from the hospital. The ER entrance was about 40 yards away, just up a little hill.
- tsotha 14y agoThat may have had nothing to do with money though. Maybe he just didn't make it. I had a cousin in a rural town who drove himself to the hospital 40 miles away in the middle of a heart attack. Because there wasn't anybody else. He could easily have ended up the same way.
- nullc 14y agoThey didn't have ambulances in your cousin's town?
- tsotha 14y agoNope. It's one of those little towns in western Pennsylvania where there are no jobs and the young people move away as soon as they can. By now the average age must be over 60. There must be about 50 people living there, though there were thousands a few generations ago when it was an oil town. In theory there are ambulances that cover the county, but there's really no point in waiting 40 minutes for the ambulance to get there so you can wait another 40 minutes as they drive back. Anyway, he probably could have gotten a neighbor to drive him. Not sure why he didn't. Most likely the neighbors were drunk, since once hunting season is over that's what passes for entertainment. Not that they don't get drunk while they're hunting. Probably the only thing worse than driving yourself to the hospital during a heart attack is having your drunk neighbor crash the car in which you're having a heart attack. The funny part of the story is he got someone to call ahead so the hospital was expecting him. He gets to the emergency room and the ER nurse (there's only one) says "Have a seat. We have an emergency case coming in any minute." He sits down wondering what kind of shape you have to be in to bump a heart attack patient. But he figured after 40 minutes he was still alive, so it probably wasn't going to kill him. He's kind of a stoic guy, too, so he didn't protest. Just sat down. Five minutes later the nurse runs back into the waiting room with wide eyes, points at him and says "It's you!"
- bcx 14y agoI don't love the political tone of this article. But while on the topic of healthcare, did any of you guys have an amazing time getting healthcare for your companies? We found it was quite a bit of work, especially multi-state. Talking to entrepreneurs in other countries, not having to deal with healthcare for employees really let them focus on their product and their company, and not how to insure a small growing team across state lines.
- orangecat 14y agoLibertarians and socialists agree that having employers provide health insurance is a staggeringly idiotic system. Libertarians would replace it with individual policies, and socialists would replace it with single payer. I favor the former (with subsidies for people who can't afford it due to poverty or preexisting conditions), but either would be much better than what we have now. Unfortunately the average voter wants both "free" healthcare, and doesn't want the government running it, so every employer ends up being an insurance broker as well.
- guelo 14y agoObamacare is basically the system that you say you favor.
- zanny 14y agoWe still have yet to see what comes of it in 2014. I'm not hopeful, but the foundations have been laid for much worse that produced reasonable results.
- orangecat 14y agoObamacare increases the burden on employers, and generally prohibits high-deductible health insurance policies that are actually insurance (as opposed to comprehensive policies which cover minor and predictable expenses). It's probably still better than the status quo, but it means we lose the option of going with a plan that's actually good like Wyden-Bennett (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthy_Americans_Act).
- Casseres 14y agoIs this article against debt collectors, or politics that make paying for medical treatment one's own responsibility? There is at least one lady who makes a living by suing telemarketers that violate the law. There are individual cases of people suing debt collectors for violating the law. Here is one recent case: http://consumerist.com/2012/10/12/disabled-vet-says-debt-collector-told-him-you-should-have-died/ http://consumerist.com/2012/10/12/disabled-vet-says-debt-col... Perhaps someone can come up with a business idea that will put debt collectors in check?
- navpatel 14y agoThe article is against the absurd health system the US is running. A business idea to put debt collectors in check is not even a bandaid for this problem. There are very legitimate ways people are being screwed in this country. The title is literal and true; it should be very easy to spot how screwed things are when "Suicide in Cheaper"
- jayfaley 14y agoSometimes it's better to just die. Or so I've been told. And unless you haven't experienced the dark that some unfortunate people do, you nor I can really say otherwise, can we?
- zanny 14y agoHis reasons were not due to a lack of a will to live, but due to a desire not to harm others through burdening them with his debt. An ambulance ride alone can cost upwards of $800 in the US.
- koningrobot 14y agoI agree. Death is always an option, and sometimes it's the best (equivalently "least bad") one. Despite the title, the article actually argues from the point of view that death is never an option. This is a harmful black-and-white view. If you assign effectively infinite disutility to death then you can no longer say, for instance, that a painful death is worse than a painless one. Surely we can all agree that this is the wrong way to go about decision-making.
- shadowmint 14y agoIf you dont think the article is appropriate because of its 1) non technical nature, 2) political nature or 3) some other reason then: 1) Don't upvote it. 2) Don't comment on it. 3) Don't read the comments on it, because you clearly wont be able to hold yourself back from responding. These simple guidelines will help you in many circumstances, and can be summarized with: dont feed trolls (come on? health care debate? again? this is flame bait)
- ryanwaggoner 14y agoEven better, flag it.
- shinratdr 14y agoExactly. Why not take your own advice instead of harassing me in the comments? If the community feels it needs to be flagged, then it will. I wouldn't get your hopes up.
- ryanwaggoner 14y agoThis story was flagged off the homepage almost as soon as it appeared. I don't see it anywhere in the first five or six pages of results, logged in or logged out.
- Zigurd 14y agoThis applies directly to the conditions of workers in the US. The kind of uninsured workers we discuss on this board are young and healthy. The bad outcomes are rare. But they do happen. If you expect your young coders to work without benefits and little pay, you should know the risks you have placed on them.
- anovikov 14y agoLet the government do all the nice things it must naturally do for society, and you will find youself in Gulag, where everyone has a job, and housing, education, entertainment and healthcare are all free and equal for everyone.
- mcantelon 14y agoYeah, it's certainly like that in other countries with universal healthcare, although their state media does a good job covering up the fact they've enslaved the population. /s
- Alex3917 14y ago"But it's not because no one will take them." The research doesn't really support this. People without insurance are much more likely to die in the E.R. once they get there, even after controlling for relevant health factors.
- nullc 14y agoI guess I can see how they could control for differential access to preventative care resulting in ER visits with worse outcomes, or dilution by people with insurance visiting the ER with less serious problems... Even how they could control for early treatment in an ambulance vs a drive in. But I'm interested in how they controlled for hesitance to go in the first place delaying treatment? Same condition, but you spent an extra half hour deliberating before going.
- dsr_ 14y agoWhy is Y Combinator focused on relatively young entrepreneurs? [1] Because they have fewer worries about health care and similar long term costs. If health care costs were not an issue, one major barrier for older entrepreneurs would be removed. [1] YC selects for younger people: they need to be willing to relocate for 3 months, work on a high-risk project for most of their waking hours, and otherwise dedicate their lives to success. Does PG keep stats on age of founders? Age of successful founders? Any correlation?
- ryanwaggoner 14y agoDebt collectors constantly break the law when collecting for auto debt as well; does that mean the government should pay for people's cars?
- naturalethic 14y agoFree up doctors to work without the guild bullshit. Ron Paul treated people for free all the time.
- softgrow 14y agoEven when health care is free people will still refuse. Former volunteer EMT from Australia read the post expecting the normal straight out refusal. People would refuse treatment, relatives wring hands, but at least you could start talking about having them certified insane. That always worked except for one case were we started the process and it dawned on the gentleman that he would rather go to hospital than be labelled mad. People would also want to avoid some hospitals and with little choice we would take them further and a fair part of the time they would have a worsening of the chest pain or worse still, arrest. Glad we didn't have to worry about hospital bills. Would be really frustrating to have to remove equipment/treatment, drive away and hope for a worsening.