Met an RN a couple days ago, told her about my cheap healthcare plan (daily spinach and fruit smoothies, multi grain cheerios with their 9 embedded vitamins 100% daily recommended, variable protein sources with constant physical activity, lots of untreated water if possible, staying on the move and paying attention at all times so as not to get injured). We discussed socialized medicine of other nations, and she seemed to show an aversion to it. Her argument was that not as many people would want to get into medicine since they wouldn't be paid as much. She works in ER so the first thing I think of is trauma which is different than caring for a lethargic citizen decaying away because of their own habits.
But privatised healthcare generates the fear of the high medical bill, and this could incentivize people to exercise caution (pun? kinda). I personally would not prefer to give doctors all my money in the final few years of a sedentary life spent carelessly.
Would you please stop using HN for political and ideological battle? We've had to ask you this several times already. Ignoring moderation requests eventually gets your accounts banned on HN.
Was it in-appropriate under a post that was itself politically-charged? I've seen quite a lot of others advocating for political policies without censure. For instance, I saw a large number of commenters arguing about the pros and cons of UBI under a recent post about Yang's automation fears being over-blown.
That's a somewhat complicated question, because the OP in this case was probably a bad one for HN. But the short answer is yes, it was inappropriate even under a post that was itself politically charged—because sometime good submissions are politically charged. In those cases following the guidelines is even more important than usual, and also is harder than usual.
You can say that about anything governments do: roads, police, schools, electrical grids, national defence... The fact is that you live in a society and benefit from so many things it provides. Additionally, society benefits from having you contribute to it.
I rarely see people with a position like yours demonstrate their commitment to fierce independence by moving out to the wilderness and surviving off the land completely on their own. Why is that?
I think it's because you take for granted all of the things society provides for you and generally attribute all of your successes to your own efforts. That is a mindset which can lead only to resentment and isolation, but maybe that's what you want?
Anyone does have the right to vote for it, that's how it works. People can decide it's best if everyone shares the burden of unexpected tragedy, just like people decided it's best if everyone pays for street lights, roads, police, firemen, rubbish collection and armies.
"a la carte" infrastructure sounds very expensive. Where does it stop, do we shift the entire cost of handicap accessible sidewalks on to those that use it?
Why medicine in particular? Presumably you don’t get so worked up about your tax dollars going towards paved roads or police stations. Your objections seem somewhat arbitrary
For an extreme example a homeless drunk spending most of their income on alcohol is paying a 40% tax for the privilege. Benefits are of course a separate issue, but few want to calculate benefits from free roads, Medicare, police, or Social Security as government welfare.
At the other end Bill Gates actual lifetime income is vastly higher than his taxable income due to the charitable tax deduction and capitals gains being deferred until sale.
1) Plenty of people complain about progressive taxation and advocate for a flat tax.
2) Progressive tax is not arbitrary. As income increases, a higher % of spending is discretionary. Nearly all of the working class’ income goes to basic necessities. That is part of the rationale.
you do already via medicare/medicaid though, and it's likely that skipping small preventative (=> cheap) procedures via being uninsured is costing you a lot when people with chronic conditions land in either of those programs due to age/poverty/disability associated with their illness
Society - with myriad complex and resource-involving arrangements and institutions - predates the very existence of the human individual's consciousness. Your very ability to express your thoughts to yourself is the result of the activity of other members of society.
It is only quite recently in history that people (who aren't hermits going into the wilderness) have been making the "but I want to be left alone" argument. It is an unfortunate result of the concentration of property and means of production in recent centuries and the ideology it engendered and disseminated.
But privatised healthcare generates the fear of the high medical bill, and this could incentivize people to exercise caution (pun? kinda). I personally would not prefer to give doctors all my money in the final few years of a sedentary life spent carelessly.