VariantplexRun0109
26797
985
27
Aug 12, 2025 6:59 PM
VariantplexRun0109
26797
985
27
IncognitoEnthusiast
This is a big reason why Id like to jump the pond. Even working the same dead end job, when I factor in healthcare, my family would SAVE money. It's absolutely maddening.
originfoomanchu1
They view them the same as thry do prisons only there to make money,
No rehabilitation just a money grab.
So glad I live in the UK if I lived in America i would either by dead or in multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt
eiger3970
Yes, have lived and worked in 2 countries with public health costing 2% of taxes which covers everyone. Another country has compulsory private health care which costs about 10% of income and people with no income aren't covered due to inability to pay (some assistance takes 6 months and then private health care wants retroactive payments on the lump sum, which is impossible without income). Public has the large and serious equipment and greater numbers of patients.
lightfoot2
Well sure. But the US is really fucked up that way and we seem to like to think of health as a "privilege".
HardyandRamanujan
I'm glad to live in a country with universal health care, but ain't no way its costing 5%. Usually measured by GDP, Germany, France and Canada all ring in at about 12.5%. Still less than USA at 17.5%
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/health_spending_as_percent_of_gdp/
DrBukkakeShots69
This why I became dual citizen because fuck paying insurance or medical bills here. It takes me 30 min to cross over and done. Cheaper or free depending on where I go.
FloodingWaters
Ya'll shoulda seen me laughing at my conservative dad's assertion that my generation (born '81) was set to inherit trillions (collectively). My father, unless you got a plan that I can't fathom, you will be spending my entire ass inheritance on your end of life care. I ain't even mad. I got no claims to that bag based on my own efforts, just blood. But do not bullshit yourself. Your life's work is headed for the investors of health insurance companies and whatnot.
ImHereToExplainTheJoke
People don't understand that 75% of the money we pay for healthcare does not go to healthcare. It goes to things like administrative cost, insurance profits, middle management companies that the big carriers use to administer claims, executive bonuses, and heavily inflated cost items that hospitals use to pad the bill to insurance. Think charging $30 for an Aspirin type things. Don't believe me? Go to your hospital's billing department and tell them you're broke and have no insurance after an-
ImHereToExplainTheJoke
emergency, and see how far they're willing to drive down the prices on things to get paid. My cousin got sent a 25k bill in the mail after a car accident took him to the ER. Once he negotiated things down? 9k on a 5 year payment plan. Still probably too expensive for what amounted to a broken limb, a few imaging studies and blood tests, and staying in the hospital for a day to be monitored, but my point stands.
AlterSack
"very little" in the sense of nothing. That's what you meant, right?
Revicus
It's important to remember that when someone says a certain government policy, service, or other operation costs some amount, it's worth asking what (if anything) it saves. The gross cost is often deceptively presented without the savings as if it were the final net cost. Similarly, the reverse should apply if you hear how much something saves but not how much it costs. You can probably think of examples you've seen of either being used deceptively by presenting it on its own.
dudehiemer
The USA gives Israel around 230 BILLION dollars a year in financial and military aid, GIVES mind you, and they only charge their citizens 3.1% for universal healthcare.
PersonalityFire
Look, we definitely shouldn't give Israel a red fucking cent, they are committing a genocide with our tax dollars, it's atrocious. But we have given them about $300bn since *1946*, not 230bn per year: https://www.cfr.org/article/us-aid-israel-four-charts
scummos
I'm sorry to disappoint you but I'm in a country with mandatory governmental health insurance and it's definitely not anywhere near 5%... 20% isn't far off.
Evi1Gav
No, no, no, no, no. Universal healthcare won't take any more tax than is currently being paid. The US government pays, per capita, an amount that would put its socialised healthcare in the top 10 or so countries for funding. That's already accounted for in taxation. Everyone could stop paying copays, and out of network charges, and all the other bullshit. They could spend that money on things, buying things drives an economy. The US would be significantly better off.
XaoJet
Come now, its not just healthcare, pretty much every essential commodity in this system is controlled, monopolized and exploited by the billionaire class. Healthcare, food, rent... I mean they pretty much own the bottom of Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
woozle
CoffeeMakesMeTwitchy
Plus deductibles, coinsurance, be in the network of approved providers. I hate it here
woozle
same
CrisprCAS
"How would we pay for it?" We already do pay for it, we just don't get it.
JayEnfield
Americans pay more taxes for healthcare than countries with universal. Not more total, more TAXES already support the status quo, all of the private money is on top of that. 5-ish percent of the entire American GDP is just healthcare waste being siphoned off to health insurance middlemen.
TheJuiceLoosener
Pay for it 4x over, and still don't get it
powwerbottom
Yep. And all those people that come to the ER who leave without paying because they can't afford it? We pay for those people too, via EMTALA and other subsidies and programs. Our taxes are already paying for the healthcare of "others" at exorbitant rates to private companies instead of wholesale prices to a universal system.
graehall
That's what's crazy, seeing conservative assholes claim that taxpayers are leeches. No, they paid their taxes. PROVIDE THEM SERVICES FFS
malbec
They actually mean, “how will we profit from it?!”
Hexidimentional
Its what canadians have been trying to tell you, but you'd rather call us communists
PersonalityFire
Yep, the Federal government subsidizes the current system for just over $1TN per year. The CBO estimates that Medicare for all would cost... about $1TN per year. Except no more copays or wild emergency charges fucking people into debt. Not to mention we probably wouldn't need as large of a VA if everyone just had comprehensive coverage. It'd cost less money and it'd be more efficient, if you need a fiscally conservative argument to help you. Anyway: https://www.dsausa.org/get-involved/
PersonalityFire
Source: https://www.peoplespolicyproject.org/2020/12/11/cbo-medicare-for-all-reduces-health-spending/
PersonalityFire
Source: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58103
literallymike
NightOwlRally
That's why I call it "Wealthcare"
FeloniousMonk13
The heart of the problem is the private insurance system. It extracts billions from the transaction between patient and provider, and gives it to execs and shareholders. Step one to fix our broken healthcare system: abolish private health insurance.
Karma1970
This 100%
faro2000
Switzerland has universal health care but it's illegal not to have *private* health insurance.
The difference is that insurers are obliged to provide basic coverage on a non-profit basis and if that coverage is too expensive vs. the individual's salary the government gives a subsidy to assist.
=> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland
torokunai
The Clinton admin tried that and boy howdy did they get their head handed to them
cgt9803
Health control and gun care.
BearableBear
Oligarchies posing as democracies
sneakypoo
Went to the ER a couple weeks ago. Ended up in my own room (I risked infecting others), five-ish hours, blood work etc. Paid $25.
sneakypoo
This was in Sweden. People say our healthcare is "free" due to taxes, it's not, but it's very cheap.
myloveforyouislikeatruckberserker
The US system is obviously corrupt beyond belief.. but 5% sounds way too low. I’m in the UK and my national insurance is about 12%? Everything covered though, no question that any sort of treatment needed would ever not be provided.
gablestout
So, I get the point, but 20%?? On average, about 4% is spent by workers in families with employer coverage. Sauce: Peterson Center on Healthcare
Blacktusk
Employer healthcare plans are compensation hidden away as an untaxed perk. If you make 100k a year and have a $20k healthcare plan, then 16% of your total compensation is healthcare. If you're paying wages towards it, the % goes up, not to mention copay and deductible costs. After that, some amount of your taxes go to to government healthcare anyway. So the 20% is an estimate of the current costs, rather than what people necessarily see come out of their wallet.
gablestout
The green bar includes out of pocket expenses (copay, deductible...), and the argument that an employer-paid benefit is hidden compensation is difficult, because the benefit exists whether you use it or not, if you don't use the insurance, you don't take home the employer portion. Now were talking about Total Compensation value, which is a completely different calculation and discussion, and is not $1:$1
But, my point is that the graphic states "20% you currently pay" which is not true.
Antininny
Most people don't know that Mr. Burns owns a shit-ton of healthcare stocks.
Clockworkdancerobot
Separating healthcare from your job means you can leave bad jobs without the spectre of losing healthcare. That would hurt bad employers.
somewhatparanoidpanda
It also means you can start a business
EmperorWiggles
This is a big one, it'd be a boon for small business owners.
Clockworkdancerobot
Something larger businesses are opposed to. They hate competition.
MyFavoritesIsAllComics
It’s almost like this whole thing is a massive tangle web of BS, that was intentional. The system isn’t broken, it’s operating as intended and must be destroyed.
vigilante397
Exactly this. I have a small business that makes more than my day job and I would love to do it full time, but I can't afford to lose the insurance I get from the day job. So I keep both jobs and just don't sleep.
Sticklebrickk
Currently, we cannot start a business with the slave wages we have been offered for more than a decade now.
invaderjak
I make a hair over 100k per year. Wife and I have chronic health issues. I have a plan with 100% after deductible, and premiums + deductible costs me over $20k per year.
Insane to think about how people's quality of life could improve, or how much it would stimulate the economy if people like me had that cash available to spend instead of padding insurance provider's bottom line.
LurkandJerk
We make decent money, but my one heel has several bone spurs and I have a tear in my rotator cuff. Both need surgery but I'm trying to time them for the deductible and to maximize PT for shoulder especially. It hurts to walk, hurts to lift my kids, but playing this stupid ass game is ridiculous.
invaderjak
Right? I’m luckily able to have an HSA account with my insurance plan. So I always have enough to cover my deductible. There are other stupid games I can play like pharmaceutical co-pay assistance cards where I get a discount on the medications, but the full price still applies to my deductible.
duktayp
2016 Bernie Sanders proposed universal healthcare through payroll deductions... His own party shit on him, and the Republicans screamed TAX INCREASE
FinancialRavioli
His own party... the independents?
TheWhiteBarry
You know damn well he caucuses with Dems and that the DNC pulled the rug on him TWICE
FinancialRavioli
He does caucus with the democrats. But he's an independent.
VariantplexRun0109
The affordable care act in its proposal stage was going to have a government option. It was nixed on a deal with The Grand old Pedophile party so that Obama could extend unemployment benefits. I was so disapointed.
torokunai
that and Lieberman. Turned out the Dems didn't need 60 votes in the Senate to pass it in the end, they had to cut the GOP filibuster off with the Byrd BS
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Confirmation of that: here in Australia Medicare is 2% of your pre-tax income, equating to ~$20-$30/week. all hospital stays are free including medication. All cancer, stroke, heart attack care is free. Nb: people can opt to use the private system but do not need to.
faro2000
Is the information on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Australia#Medicare_and_the_universal_health_care_system incorrect?
That states 2% for Medicaid but it doesn't cover everything (+ ambulance costs, for example, and "subsidises a portion of each 'episode' of a health service"), plus there's another levy up to 1.5% if you're over 35 without private insurance.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
No the info I got is from my own tax returns and public websites agree. The ambulance is per state but membership is as cheap as $53/year in my state, or if on a health or age pension or *medically necessary and decreed by the health service* then free (sources: my membership and I literally book transport as part of my hospital job and hospital foots the bill *so* often).
The 1%-1.5% starts at AUD$100k/year (top 15% of earners) income and is avoided by paying for private health insurance.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Also: Medicare not Medicaid.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Ah coming back again because I didn't read your message entirely. *All* of public hospital care is free, from surgery, inpatient stay, birth, rehab, medication etc. *most* of GP/primary care consults are free (except that shifted recently and there's been a big kickback from the country and it'll likely go back to being entirely free). People can and often DO go to private GP's who don't bulk bill (make it free) and they pay out of pocket anything from 40-60%, but it's by choice. 1/2
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Even within Private Health, though I don't work there so can't tell you percentages) the Medicare portion is paid and then the private health insurance pays a portion on-top. The 'consumer' of private health pays something per 'episode' either an excess fee, a percent of incidental costs or other. Regardless, no Aussie citizen/permanent resident *ever* gets a bill for 100k in any hospital.
RobErtE87
Is that number accurate? In Germany it's around 16% of your salary. 14.6% shared between employer and employee plus an additional percentage that varies depending on your health provider. I doubt american employers will be happy to pay half.
pattalam
In the USA, it's around 4% for family coverage. My employer pays a similar amount on my behalf too.
faro2000
Despite the absurd bills issued to patients, the total amount spent on health in the USA is surprisingly not all that much higher than in Germany as a percentage of GDP. The money still has to come from somewhere and it's probably wishful thinking that any employer costs won't be passed on to the general public indirectly.
=> https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy7zvp5xrqo
faro2000
The UK's (failing) NHS cost £226 billion (2023/24) which, divided by 36 million tax payers = ~£6,275 each = 19% of the median salary of £33,000.
The money comes from the people directly or indirectly but it's optimistic to think 19% can be reduced to 5% "of your paycheck".
At present, the UK's standard band employee National Insurance tax rate is 8% + 15% from the employer, but that *doesn't* pay for the NHS which relies also on general taxation.
NoNameFred
... Okay, but you're comparing a Mean value (£6,275 per person) against a Median value (£33,000 per person). That's just deliberately bad statistics. If you have 6 people, earning: £25k, £28k, £30k, £35k, £42k, or £1 million, then the Median salary is $32.5k — but, if they each pay 5% of their salary, that's £58k in total. Divided by the 6 taxpayer, gives you 9.6k… which is 29.7% of the median salary. You've artificially INFLATED the 5% to get that 29% (or 19%)
faro2000
The sample is 36 million, not six (with a mean of £193,000 in your example). The difference between UK mean and median salary is about 15%, but it makes more sense to take a typical (median) individual for a quick-and-dirty calculation on basic "universal" healthcare.
If you're on £200,000 or £1,000,000 per year it's almost certain that you are *not* going to rely on the NHS (exclusively, or at all) unless private medicine is banned.
NoNameFred
It only "makes sense" to take a typical/median individual if you ALSO take the typical/median contributions. Yes, 6 is a much smaller sample size, but that was to simplify the demonstration that your framework/model was fundamentally flawed. And, being on £200k and deciding not to use the NHS doesn't mean that you get to 'opt out' of National Insurance contributions, so bringing that up is just a red herring...
faro2000
For anyone earning over ~£50k the National Insurance rate drops from 8% to 2% so, yes, you do "opt-out" of paying 75% of the standard contribution.
There are a huge number of complications in any calculation at both ends of the salary scale, plus age considerations/costs, etc., so it's not "fundamentally flawed" to take a typical individual vs. typical costs/person for healthcare as a rough estimate. It's way more than "5%", all told, wherever that comes from.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Here in Aus it's 2%, I checked. We could very much do with it being more as public health is groaning under the weight of population growth. But yeah it's 2%
RtsWillH1Mself
A large, healthy population probably contributes to that number. It would be pretty spendy in the US with all the health issues arising. We are just now banning toxic food dyes.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
I mean ... Even more of a reason for universal health care, wouldn't you agree? The level of preventative care your country could implement to improve the existing health and prevent further disease would make a huge impact. Googling your claim of healthier workforce: it's hard to compare at a glance as we don't do metrics like HALE, but it seems while, yeah, USA has more years of disease burdon than us, we both have (roughly) 60-70% labor force participation.
RtsWillH1Mself
I would agree to an extent. But I don't feel that the government would be enforcing that and probably would be more concerned about money also. But I'm not against them getting in the game and driving down insurance and treatment costs. Healthcare used to be cheap and approved everything less than 20 years ago.
OnlyPositiveFavourites
Unfortunately if the lean is on insuring agencies then the burdon of healthcare cost is still placed on the poor and unwell. Society only works via altruism.