Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by businesscasual 1528 days ago
But why do you have to think about this at all? Wouldn't it just be easier that this was provided by the state, so that all citizens could afford getting necessary health care. At the same time it would relive you of having to compare coverage, copays, deductibles or in general understand the full fine print of your insurance agreements. Most comparable industrial countries have found a pretty decent solution to this where you move the financial burden of many basic services (health care, schooling, etc.) from the public, over to the government - allowing all citizens to benefit from these, without having to wonder if the can afford it.
2 comments

Food is more important than healthcare. Do you think the production, selection, and distribution of food should be decided by the state?
I am not sure if its a justifiable comparison, typically you don't end up with a food costs in the hundres of thousands or millions in the blink of second. It's not like you all of a sudden get a bill from Mickey D for someone showing a truckload of hamburgers down your throat.

I am not completely sure where you want to go with this argument. But as a Scandinavian I am very much comfortable with the state ensuring my access to health care, knowing I do not ever have to ever have to think about medical costs, health insurance or access to one of the better health care systems in the world for me or my family. We could very much bear the costs of having private health insurance, but its just one less (big) worry...

I do think that production of food is very much a state matter - and unless you knew taxes in the US today go towards ensuring safe and predictable production of food through i.e. agricultural subsidies. I would expect the state to ensure that the country have a viable and thorough plan to ensure food supplies.

Food production is heavily subsidized in the US because a free market would wipe out producers the second market conditions impact their profitability.
Wouldn't it be easier if we all jumped into the vat of jelly with the matrix connection jacked into the back of our necks!? We wouldn't have to eat or poop or sleep. We could just trust the powerful to make every decision for us. It would be soooo much easier.

Forgive me, but when it comes to my healthcare I want the most choice and control as I can have. I don't want to be stuck with whatever some bureaucrat decides is worth it.

Lastly, people make stupid decisions and they get hurt. They go rock climbing or skydiving, they ride their bikes on busy streets. Why should I shoulder the responsibility for people's poor life choices.

So you're planning on paying for all of your health care out of pocket, then, since an insurance plan is right out if you don't want to help collectively shoulder the risk? I hope you've done extraordinarily well for yourself, in case you get sick.

Personally I haven't done that well and could not afford my costs if they weren't pooled with other people. I'm happy that in my case this is publicly funded, so I don't have to deal with profit-maximizing private insurance companies who are at every turn actively trying to find reasons not to cover me.

I'm also glad that people where I'm from who are less fortunate than me don't have to go without needed health care because they aren't able to get good enough jobs. In fact, I care much more about the latter than you or me being able to choose between a bunch of options. And if you're doing so well and that's what you want, private health care is typically still an option even in countries with publicly funded systems.

Oh well, too bad you still have to pay for those accidents through your insurance premium - thats how it works. The only difference is that you either pay it over tax or via a private business that will try everything to wiggle out of paying for your injuries.

How much choice and control do you really have by having a private insurance? If you get hit by a car on the street, your kid trips in the stairs, you walk into a wall and crack a rib, the difference between your and mine is that: 1) I don't have to think about what it will cost me 2) I don't have to fully understand every aspect of my insurance agreement in order to understand what I am entitled to 3) I don't have to fight a insurance company if they don't want to pay for it 4) I can just relax, have a beer, and know that I will be taken care of if something happens

> Why should I shoulder the responsibility for people's poor life choices.

You do know how private insurance works right?

Someone makes an insurance company. Then they sit down and figure out the probabilities of things happening to people. They then put a price to join the group. They then divvy up that money to people in the group that have had things happen to them.

With insurance you will always be paying for other peoples "poor life choices"... that's the way it works. Maybe one day it will be your poor life choice (or accident.)

Having state healthcare by default does not necessarily mean a ban on private healthcare. Both can coexist.

> Maybe one day it will be your poor life choice

Like being born with a certain combination of genes which aren't as healthy a combination as others. Or being hit by a car, and losing a limb. Or being shot in the head by someone and persisting in a vegetative state for years.

Yeah, the nerve of these freeloaders and their 'poor life choices'.

The rest of the world needs a country to send all the crazy asshole libertarians to. America has gracefully accepted that burden as this commenter points out.