Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

We pay nearly double for our privatized monstrosity, compared to the most expensive socialized systems. Such savings! So cheap! Very efficient! Can the treasury possibly bear the expense of spending less than double?

------

Yeah, a transition is going to be an expensive shitshow and now is not a good time, but just about any other time in the last decade was a good time and in a year or two it will be a decent time again. We'd better rip this bandaid before it soaks all our blood out.



Politics aside, money puts a cap on everything: wars, social services, etc.

The issue at hand is to take something the public spends nothing on, that the government gets for "free" and to put that on the public balance sheet - a huge cost. I guess we could balance that out with a tax, but who would like that? And even if we were to raise taxes - it wouldn't help our balance sheet since we already spend 30% more than we take in. Looking at the balance sheet as it stands today, we can't even afford what we currently spend. And inflation is on the rise.

I just don't see it ever happening. Save a collapse and total reset of the current monetary system.


> Politics aside, money puts a cap

What part of "we pay nearly double" didn't make it through?

We can't afford the enormous premium we are paying for privatized care.

> I guess we could balance that out with a tax

Payroll tax. In the vacancy left by private insurance. Scribble off one memo line, write in another. Come on, this is a 101 level objection.


> Come on, this is a 101 level objection.

You are obviously a very smart guy, jjoonathan. Why do you suppose the Democrats didn't even propose this when they had 60 Senate votes, the Presidency and the House? If its a 101 level problem why do you think that is?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: