happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,779
|
Post by happyhoix on Jan 21, 2020 7:03:36 GMT -5
They still have private insurance but they make sure everyone has coverage. - Require insurance companies to provide the same policy to everyone for the same price (no extra charges for sick or older people). - The Dutch government closely monitors how much the insurance carriers can charge. - Most of the Dutch system of hospitals are not for profit. - All Dutch people have to have insurance. Poor people have help from the government to get it. Everyone else has to pay for their own - people who refuse to buy a policy are auto assigned a polity by the government, and the 1% of the uninsured people who refuse to pay for their policy have their wages garnished. - The doctors in each area belong to a co-op system and work a couple nights per month driving a mobile unit that responses to medical problems in the overnight hours, making the Dutch #3 in the world in providing good quality healthcare even after hours. Cost is about $75 per person per month, out of pocket maximum about $750, due to government oversight. Why can't this work here? www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/17/21046874/netherlands-universal-health-insurance-private
|
|
Cheesy FL-Vol
Junior Associate
"Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing." -- Helen Keller
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:13:50 GMT -5
Posts: 6,663
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":""}
|
Post by Cheesy FL-Vol on Jan 21, 2020 7:33:10 GMT -5
They still have private insurance but they make sure everyone has coverage. - Require insurance companies to provide the same policy to everyone for the same price (no extra charges for sick or older people). - The Dutch government closely monitors how much the insurance carriers can charge. - Most of the Dutch system of hospitals are not for profit. - All Dutch people have to have insurance. Poor people have help from the government to get it. Everyone else has to pay for their own - people who refuse to buy a policy are auto assigned a polity by the government, and the 1% of the uninsured people who refuse to pay for their policy have their wages garnished. - The doctors in each area belong to a co-op system and work a couple nights per month driving a mobile unit that responses to medical problems in the overnight hours, making the Dutch #3 in the world in providing good quality healthcare even after hours. Cost is about $75 per person per month, out of pocket maximum about $750, due to government oversight. Why can't this work here? www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2020/1/17/21046874/netherlands-universal-health-insurance-privateEvery entity that makes money off of sick people would lobby fiercely against a system like this. We do need to address the root cause of how expensive medical care is in this country. If I had to guess there is a correlation between when medical lawsuits became a moneymaker and when health care became so expensive.
|
|
dezii
Distinguished Associate
Joined: May 18, 2017 14:26:36 GMT -5
Posts: 20,671
|
Post by dezii on Jan 21, 2020 11:42:51 GMT -5
I did a little googling...am posting a article of 5 best countries salaries of Doctors , ... Seems all the countries the Doctors do very well, the specialist even better..Netherlands are no slouch...Medical Doctors are over $100,000 per and up, up. I do know the cost of a Medical degree here in the States is quite costly...All graduates have a large debt to be paid off...most in many cases over a couple of hundred thousand and interest is added on... The big thing I get from the Netherlands example, all citizens are forced to have insurance whether they want it or not..If they refuse, gov't assigns insurance and takes premium out of their pay...For those who can't afford, Gov't steps in, helps... This was one of the tenants of Obama Care that was so under attack...forcing folks to have insurance...like participating in Social Security..no choice...u are in whether u want it or not. ----------------------------------------------------------------- www.careeraddict.com/top-5-countries-with-the-highest-paid-salaries-for-doctors
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 11:47:16 GMT -5
it might also be a good moment to note that Holland is one of the four best countries on Earth for upward mobility. in other words, a person born into poverty has a better chance of reaching middle class in Holland than all but a few nations on Earth. in case you are wondering, the US ranks near the bottom in this category.
I think these things are related (heath security and income mobility). think about it.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jan 21, 2020 12:04:50 GMT -5
it might also be a good moment to note that Holland is one of the four best countries on Earth for upward mobility. in other words, a person born into poverty has a better chance of reaching middle class in Holland than all but a few nations on Earth. in case you are wondering, the US ranks near the bottom in this category. I think these things are related (heath security and income mobility). think about it. Holland is NOT a country, it is a province (actually two since there is a North and a South one) in the Netherlands. Take it from a very proud Dutch Limburg native
And yes, we do have a good social system. It has a lot in common with many other northern European countries that take a similar approach.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 12:20:20 GMT -5
it might also be a good moment to note that Holland is one of the four best countries on Earth for upward mobility. in other words, a person born into poverty has a better chance of reaching middle class in Holland than all but a few nations on Earth. in case you are wondering, the US ranks near the bottom in this category. I think these things are related (heath security and income mobility). think about it. Holland is NOT a country, it is a province (actually two since there is a North and a South one) in the Netherlands. Take it from a very proud Dutch Limburg native
And yes, we do have a good social system. It has a lot in common with many other northern European countries that take a similar approach.
I've been told that before. bad habit. my apologies.
jooc: does it make sense to you WHY this presumably "socialist" nation is better for bootstrapping than the US?
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Jan 21, 2020 12:21:35 GMT -5
It's real simple their income tax rates range from 36% to 51%. Nothing is cheap
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 12:24:35 GMT -5
It's real simple their income tax rates range from 36% to 51%. Nothing is cheap and ours range from 18% to 37%.
and then, after that, we pay 20% for our healthcare, on average.
between the two, we pay 38-57%. sounds like the Dutch are getting a bargain. superior care at a lower cost.
|
|
ednkris
Well-Known Member
Joined: Feb 7, 2016 9:11:03 GMT -5
Posts: 1,176
|
Post by ednkris on Jan 21, 2020 12:35:47 GMT -5
It's real simple their income tax rates range from 36% to 51%. Nothing is cheap and ours range from 18% to 37%.
and then, after that, we pay 20% for our healthcare, on average.
between the two, we pay 38-57%. sounds like the Dutch are getting a bargain. superior care at a lower cost.
I thought our tax rate is 10 to 37% Healthcare cost is not the same as income tax. If you don't need it you don't pay extra just the premium. I know we don't even Co e close to pay 5% of our income for healthcare
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jan 21, 2020 12:41:44 GMT -5
Holland is NOT a country, it is a province (actually two since there is a North and a South one) in the Netherlands. Take it from a very proud Dutch Limburg native
And yes, we do have a good social system. It has a lot in common with many other northern European countries that take a similar approach.
I've been told that before. bad habit. my apologies.
jooc: does it make sense to you WHY this presumably "socialist" nation is better for bootstrapping than the US?
Because you only get admitted to tertiary education based on your ability and all secondary (as well as primary) schools have to teach to the same standard with exit exams. Education is just about free and students get a stipend, so there is not much of an impediment to get the necessary schooling. And there is no "heritage", or athletic admission to any of the schools. You test in or you won't get in.
And while there are no/few "million dollar jobs" for the taking out there in the market place, you also are not saddled with large student loans or fear of medical debt. I am very Dutch whenever I say good enough, is good enough. It doesn't have to be the best or the latest. Of course we do have people like that as well, but it is not a national mindset.
Too much testing in schools at ever younger ages is creeping in though, so I can only hope they will be able keep the advantage they have now.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Mar 28, 2024 18:22:31 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2020 12:56:50 GMT -5
It's been almost 40 years since I lived in Germany, but their system at the time was similar with the exception that there was no mobile night crew. There were five insurance companies that people could choose from. Premiums were deducted from our paychecks.
The way mine worked was that if there were no claims the first year, then the second year the premium went down by 20%; if there were claims, the premium stayed the same; second year no claims, premium went down by 30%; if claims, the premium stayed the same, etc. There were no deductibles or co-pays.
For each year that there were claims, the premium stayed at the same level as the previous year.
After five years, if there had been no claims, there was no charge for insurance. Since the insurance started when you got your first job, presumably between 18-21 or so, it didn't take long for an individual to get to the no-charge stage because young people are usually healthier than older people.
There was no cost to the insured person for preventive medicine such as vaccines, a yearly physical, lab tests/mammograms.
I never asked because it wouldn't have applied to me, but if you had a family policy it could take a while to get to a point where there was no charge...childbirth/babies/toddlers/young children have a way of getting sick or injured.
At the time, IIRC, my premium was the equivalent of about $100/month. Seemed to me like a sensible way to handle insurance. Who paid for the insurance once it got to a no-premium stage? I assume that the government paid the premium to the company holding the policy. What was the difference among the five? Beats me...maybe simply customer service?
Like I said, it was 40 years ago. I don't know how their systems works now but would guess that's it's essentially the same since it was a system that worked and that people could afford.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jan 21, 2020 13:19:42 GMT -5
It's been almost 40 years since I lived in Germany, but their system at the time was similar with the exception that there was no mobile night crew. There were five insurance companies that people could choose from. Premiums were deducted from our paychecks. The way mine worked was that if there were no claims the first year, then the second year the premium went down by 20%; if there were claims, the premium stayed the same; second year no claims, premium went down by 30%; if claims, the premium stayed the same, etc. There were no deductibles or co-pays. For each year that there were claims, the premium stayed at the same level as the previous year. After five years, if there had been no claims, there was no charge for insurance. Since the insurance started when you got your first job, presumably between 18-21 or so, it didn't take long for an individual to get to the no-charge stage because young people are usually healthier than older people. There was no cost to the insured person for preventive medicine such as vaccines, a yearly physical, lab tests/mammograms. I never asked because it wouldn't have applied to me, but if you had a family policy it could take a while to get to a point where there was no charge...childbirth/babies/toddlers/young children have a way of getting sick or injured. At the time, IIRC, my premium was the equivalent of about $100/month. Seemed to me like a sensible way to handle insurance. Who paid for the insurance once it got to a no-premium stage? I assume that the government paid the premium to the company holding the policy. What was the difference among the five? Beats me...maybe simply customer service? Like I said, it was 40 years ago. I don't know how their systems works now but would guess that's it's essentially the same since it was a system that worked and that people could afford. I don't believe the reducing/disappearing premiums still exist, but for the rest the system is still more or less the same. DS2 and his family live there now and his second son was born there. Unlike his oldest son whose delivery etc. cost them $2k in co-pays, DGS2 was born with some significant health problems that led to multiple hospitalizations/ambulance rides/weekly cardiologist visits and ultimately open heart surgery in the first year six month of his life → co-pay for all that $0.00. Hospital bill for mom and baby (they kept them for 5 days since they wanted mom with baby while they baselined DGS2) was also $0.00.
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned they are actually a bargain since they get so much for them.
Note, while there is a ceiling to the insurance premiums what you pay is based on how much you earn (kind of like SS in the US). You do all get the exact same benefit/treatment though.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 13:29:38 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.
Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 14:49:12 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers. This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
|
Post by NastyWoman on Jan 21, 2020 15:01:46 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers. This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. Just like I am paying for schools to educate US kids, weapons the military doesn't need since we can already kill off everyone on the planet without spending one additional dollar on weapons, or farm subsidies that were not needed prior the "wonderful tariffs China is paying for", and roads that are badly maintained. When I add up state, federal, and sales tax it is not we really pay that much less in taxes. We just get an awful lot less for the money we pay into taxes.
Also, people do get sick and they will die. If you want to know why I added that last statement look up the expenditure distribution of the cost of healthcare for the average person. Most of us will not get out of here cheaply.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:10:18 GMT -5
This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. Just like I am paying for schools to educate US kids, weapons the military doesn't need since we can already kill off everyone on the planet without spending one additional dollar on weapons, or farm subsidies that were not needed prior the "wonderful tariffs China is paying for", and roads that are badly maintained. When I add up state, federal, and sales tax it is not we really pay that much less in taxes. We just get an awful lot less for the money we pay into taxes.
Also, people do get sick and they will die. If you want to know why I added that last statement look up the expenditure distribution of the cost of healthcare for the average person. Most of us will not get out of here cheaply.
Along the same lines, go look at what the US Government already spends in healthcare annually. They essentially already spend per capita what other countries spend per capita that provide robust government-provided healthcare. The answer to why we can't copy the Dutch Healthcare system is "the government is completely and utterly inefficient". The great news is that it's not really an issue of "we need higher taxes to do this"...because putting more money into a horribly inefficient system does not magically create efficiency. But again, many people don't really care THAT much about the inefficiency, because the vast majority of people aren't subsidizing someone else, they're getting far more than they pay in. And people tend to care a lot less about inefficiency with someone else's money than they do their own. But people SHOULD be bothered by that inefficiency, because everyone could be getting so much MORE if the government were efficient.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 15:17:57 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers. This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. Don't you pay for police and fire services, even though you never use them? Would you prefer to not have them, and put out your own fire when your house is in flames?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 15:19:00 GMT -5
Do you think people should not pay school taxes if they have no kids? An educated society helps EVERYONE.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:22:30 GMT -5
This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. Don't you pay for police and fire services, even though you never use them? Would you prefer to not have them, and put out your own fire when your house is in flames? I never use police and fire services?
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 15:24:30 GMT -5
Don't you pay for police and fire services, even though you never use them? Would you prefer to not have them, and put out your own fire when your house is in flames? I never use police and fire services? If a person doesn't, should they still pay?
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:26:41 GMT -5
I never use police and fire services? If a person doesn't, should they still pay? Is there a person who doesn't? If there are people who aren't covered by any law enforcement agency (I'll ignore the word "police" since some people aren't covered by police and instead by sheriff's, etc) then no, those people shouldn't be paying for services they aren't receiving.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 15:31:29 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers. This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses . If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. I never used the $7 a day daycare, but I'm happy to pay it. It means that more women can go out and work and pay taxes. My son didn't go to university, but I'm still happy to pay it. It means a more educated society. I never used the subsidized nursing homes for seniors, but i'm happy to pay it. I don't want seniors out on the street or languishing in hell holes because they can't afford the expensive ones. I never used subsidized housing, but I'm happy to pay it. I don't want to see families living under bridges. It's the proverbial Stone Soup. Everyone benefits. We take care of our own.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Jan 21, 2020 15:34:02 GMT -5
So many on the right don't want to part with a nickel if it helps somebody else. What's up with that?
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:38:18 GMT -5
This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses . If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. I never used the $7 a day daycare, but I'm happy to pay it. It means that more women can go out and work and pay taxes. My son didn't go to university, but I'm still happy to pay it. It means a more educated society. I never used the subsidized nursing homes for seniors, but i'm happy to pay it. I don't want seniors out on the street or languishing in hell holes because they can't afford the expensive ones. I never used subsidized housing, but I'm happy to pay it. I don't want to see families living under bridges. It's the proverbial Stone Soup. Everyone benefits. We take care of our own. When you say you're "happy to pay it"...are you in the upper echelon of earners/taxpayers in the country? Because the VAST majority of people don't pay enough taxes to even cover themselves and the benefits they receive, much less cover social programs for other people. It's easy to be "happy to pay" when others are still subsidizing you. It's easy to say "I'm happy to pay it" when you didn't actually pay it and someone else did. It's like saying "Cars and houses for everyone" and someone saying "I'm not getting a house, but I'm still happy to pay for everyone else to have one, here's my $20 now please give me my car". That $20 doesn't even cover your car, so yes you should be very happy to pay the $20 and get a car in return. People getting more back than they ever pay in will almost always be quite happy to pay, because they aren't actually paying for any of that other stuff.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 15:40:20 GMT -5
and ours range from 18% to 37%.
and then, after that, we pay 20% for our healthcare, on average.
between the two, we pay 38-57%. sounds like the Dutch are getting a bargain. superior care at a lower cost.
I thought our tax rate is 10 to 37%Healthcare cost is not the same as income tax. If you don't need it you don't pay extra just the premium. I know we don't even Co e close to pay 5% of our income for healthcare you thought wrongly. SSI+MC is +7.65%, but the top tax bracket only pays 1.45%
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:41:42 GMT -5
So many on the right don't want to part with a nickel if it helps somebody else. What's up with that? If I'm going to put money into helping somebody else, I'd rather put it into a system which efficiently helps other people. Our federal and state governments are horrible at it. If you want to contribute $1,000 you'd be better off getting 1,000 one-dollar bills and lighting them on fire in front of a homeless person, at least they'd get some heat from it. The government is just going to give half of it to bureaucracy and go light the other half on fire in some secured warehouse where nobody will even get the benefit of the heat.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 15:43:39 GMT -5
DS2 always, like so many others, used to go on about how taxes in Europe were so high. He has since come to realize that as dj mentioned actually a bargain since they get so much for them.Yes. our taxes are high too, but that covers a LOT of stuff. Not just healthcare, but $7 a day childcare, very affordable higher education, affordable eldercare, lengthy maternity leave, subsidized housing and so much more. We get a lot of bang for our buck. American citizens pay so much more when you factor these expenses in. I damned near had a heart attack when I found out how much you pay for daycare and nursing homes, not to mention taking out mortgages on your houses so your children can become doctors. lawyers or engineers. This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. but everyone needs healthcare, right?
the alternative is an untimely death. which, I guess, is an option. I can off myself today, I suppose, and save everyone some money.
but it is more humane to hope that we will all live to 100 and utilize our insurance. it is a better societal expectation.
agree/disagree?
PS- the US really needs to stop putting their workers at the mercy of employers. even WalMart thinks so.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 15:46:53 GMT -5
So many on the right don't want to part with a nickel if it helps somebody else. What's up with that? If I'm going to put money into helping somebody else, I'd rather put it into a system which efficiently helps other people. Our federal and state governments are horrible at it. If you want to contribute $1,000 you'd be better off getting 1,000 one-dollar bills and lighting them on fire in front of a homeless person, at least they'd get some heat from it. The government is just going to give half of it to bureaucracy and go light the other half on fire in some secured warehouse where nobody will even get the benefit of the heat. this is absolutely untrue. the VA, for example, operates at a lower cost, and with HIGHER approval from users than the private healthcare/insurance system.
disclosure: I am utterly opposed to private healthcare insurance. i am sick and tired of having companies work against healthy outcomes for me and my family. it only took ONE experience with this to turn me off forever. i will NEVER advocate for this adversarial system....ever....again. fuck those people.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Jan 21, 2020 15:51:34 GMT -5
This is typically the crossroads though right? EVERYONE is paying for these services via their taxes, it's a great deal if you USE those services because someone else is paying part of your expenses. If you're NOT using those services, you're paying for someone else's services. That distinction likely colors your view on whether it's a good deal and whether you get "so much" for them. No different than the discussion Your Money about employer benefits. If you use them, it's great, someone else is subsidizing your benefit. If you don't use them, you're just getting a lower pay in return. but everyone needs healthcare, right?
the alternative is an untimely death. which, I guess, is an option. I can off myself today, I suppose, and save everyone some money.
but it is more humane to hope that we will all live to 100 and utilize our insurance. it is a better societal expectation.
agree/disagree?
PS- the US really needs to stop putting their workers at the mercy of employers. even WalMart thinks so.
Everyone needs healthcare, and the federal government has proven wholly incapable of administering healthcare. They already spend what many countries spend per capita, countries who provide healthcare to EVERYONE. If you're pouring water through a colander, and it's doing a poor job of holding water, you don't just turn the faucet up to pump more water through the colander. You have to get a bowl, or at least plug up the holes. Throwing money at inefficient systems doesn't make the system more efficient. It just means wasting more money.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jan 21, 2020 15:56:04 GMT -5
but everyone needs healthcare, right?
the alternative is an untimely death. which, I guess, is an option. I can off myself today, I suppose, and save everyone some money.
but it is more humane to hope that we will all live to 100 and utilize our insurance. it is a better societal expectation.
agree/disagree?
PS- the US really needs to stop putting their workers at the mercy of employers. even WalMart thinks so.
Everyone needs healthcare, and the federal government has proven wholly incapable of administering healthcare. They already spend what many countries spend per capita, countries who provide healthcare to EVERYONE. completely false.
again: the VA is lower cost and has more satisfaction than private care in the US.
if you are going to keep repeating that trope over and over again, we might as well end this discussion.
|
|