Seems like a lot of the discussion is centered on the topic of health care costs in the US, while the original post--I believe--was raising the issue of access to insurance coverage.
The high cost of medical care is an tricky economic problem that may or may not be amenable to some interventions such as transparency of costs, malpractice reform, or making consumers have more "skin in the game."
But given the current high-price situation...here's my question: If we agree that human beings have a "right" to medical care (at least in critical situations), do we extend that to agree that human beings have a right to receive that medical care without bankrupting themselves and without becoming exposed to risk of financial ruin for the rest of their lives?
I think we should.
The system most developed countries have devised for dealing with this issue is insurance. In some countries the insurance is mandated, national in scope, and financed by taxes. But in the US, insurance is a private, for-profit system, and it is NOT a right.
In the US, the costs for treating catastrophic injury or illness are too high for all but the richest people to pay from their assets. This makes medical insurance a necessity if one wants financial security. In the US, once someone become ill, the current private, for-profit insurance scheme does not have any obligation to include that person in an insurance pool, leaving them open to the risk of financial ruin the next time they are afflicted by accident or illness.
What's needed is a system whereby all residents of our country are able to join some kind of insurance pool. This could be accomplished by providing a government sponsored insurance pool, or by some amount of regulation that requires insurance companies to find a way to include all comers. Or some combination. That's the task I'd like to see our legistlators take on.
The current system, where insurance is only available to the healthy (or the employed of certain firms), leaves too many open to bankruptcy at the next accident.
Yes, some people would end up paying more to help cover the expenses of other people. THAT'S THE WAY INSURANCE POOLS WORK. Everyone chips in some to cover the costs of those who are struck by calamity. It spreads the risk. If I never get sick or injured, money spent on health insurance was NOT wasted...it was spent to give me the peace of mind knowing that I would not be financially ruined if that bad luck had happened to me instead.
I agree with some points in this article, but i think that the government should do more to improve the transportation of its citizens and their quality of life.
I think that moving to places with better transportation is not something all of us can afford., If you live in a good community that your children love living in, it's hard to displace them in the middle of their lives.
I have gained about 3 mpg on my Honda Element by driving 65 mpg instead of 75 mpg). First, it only takes about 1½ minutes longer to get to work. I have lowered my risk for a speeding ticket. And though the return is marginal it amounts to $15/month, $180/year.
The statement by somebody that "the majority of voters do not pay income tax" seems unlikely. It's probably true that somewhere between 30% and 40% of the potentially tax-paying residents of the U.S. pay zero income tax. But these are mostly poor and young, two categories that are among the least likely to vote. So, without documentation, we should regard the statement as right-wing hyperbole (to put it as gently as possible).
Sam acts as if this the way banks operate is some kind of secret that they don't want anyone to know about. If it's a secret, it is very poorly kept. The problem is that many Americans border on financial illiteracy. Many don't understand how compound interest works and many more do not know that making a 'spread' on money is the second oldest profession in history.
In the most simplistic terms, all financial institutions borrow short and lend long. They take your money and give you a short term interest rate (CD or savings account) and immediately lend the money out longer term at higher rates (car loans, mortgages etc.). The difference is between the two is the banker's profits. As long as the bank makes prudent loans with stringent guidelines (no interest only loans, all loans documented etc.), the system functions fairly well. Banks have always needed short term financing to be rolled over- deposits or credit must be replaced to keep the bank capitalized. In reality, the depositor has always assumed the risks right along with the bank. This is why there is FDIC because after the Depression people were afraid to put their money in banks and without depositors banks cannot make money.
So this is not a conspiracy. The US operates on what is called a 'fractional reserve system'. Banks must have only 10% or so of cash on hand at any given time- the rest is being put to work making the bank money. If there is a run on the bank, all your money isn't there and it never has been. The problem today is that insatiable greed and political corruption allowed the banks to run amok. With the help of Wall St, the Federal Reserve (which is really a private bank)and the federal government, the financial industry created the largest debt bubble in history and now we will all pay the price.
I am so glad you have written this article because it is such an emotional release for me. Both of my parents are currently being scammed by someone who claims to be or have inherited a great deal of money. I have pleaded with them for years that the businesses they invest in are fictitious but it is to no avail. This has torn my family apart, and I am the only child so no one to talk to about it. I am absolutely powerless to convince my parents. I have pleaded and pleaded and they think I shouldn't worry but the guy is a freak and moved in with them and gotten involved in their spiritual life. It is the saddest thing to see and one of the biggest things I never thought would have to face. Alzheimers runs in both my parents lines and it is their generation. Fortunately in our state there is a relatively new law where you don't have to prove cognitive defect to get an adult protective order. I don't know what good that will do. I can't do anything or I might get blamed on ruining their golden opportunity.
It's funny how people are just now figuring out that driving like an idiot is really not getting them anywhere, just more angry and pissing other people off in the process. I laugh at people who weave through traffic in their SUVs just to get to the next red light sooner. Then they complain about gas prices.
Why hurry all the time? We all get to the final destination, so you might as well enjoy the ride. ;-)
It's true what they say that too much of anything isn't good, even work. You definitely need to find a nice balance between work and the rest of life. Dude should have taken a long lunch.
I liked this post a lot. I have also been doing the same thing and, the funny thing is, I also noticed that it "feels like the 70s" when you drive at 55. It's kind of fun in its own way. Once you decide that you are going to do this, it's actually much less stressful than the other kind of driving because "beating" someone else on the road or, even, comparing yourself to other drivers on the road is not tempting anymore. That's because instead of judging yourself by comparing to others, I am getting a sense of accomplishment from driving the way I decided, at the speed I decided. If anything, now when someone passes me I'm not at all tempted to speed up and match them. Since I fully expect to be passed by 80% of the cars on the road, why bother? They can go ahead the way they want. They might be stressed or just a fast driver, or they might have a genuinely time-sensitive emergency (though probably not). In any of these cases, you can be perfectly happy letting them go by. Their passing you by almost even begins to seem like a confirmation of your success in sticking to your new driving habit. Sticking at 55 or 60 is automatically success in this mindset. I've also noticed that there seem to be more people out there like this lately, driving slower, and being more relaxed.
This is a tough question. I mean this guy in Japan was extreme. Who would EVER choose to work over living? I felt silly even writing that...
There are times when you have to work stupid amounts of hours. You have to have balance. Everyone's work is important. It pays bills and allows you to be who you are. Never put it in front of your life and always recognize the body's little hints that you may be overdoing it.
I just wrote a very good article on Temperance. I just wish this guy would have read it too.
I was a bitch driver too. Now I get books on CD, set the cruise and stay in the right lane. My commute takes a few minutes more (not many more). Many days I'm sad that I've arrived because I want to keep listening to the book. I barely notice all the speed demons in the left lane.
"All humans are more likely to waste any resource they don't see as their own. This is why government programs always grow to gargantuan size and are massively wasteful - there is no personal ownership. This is especially true since the majority of voters do not pay income tax."
I'm confused... Is that an exaggeration? How does that work?
I don't know how the income tax system works in the US. Here in Canada, most of us have to pay income tax (the amount depends on how much we earn). I do know we pay more on a whole than people in the U.S, though.
As was explained above, the poor do get treatment. Oh, a few get turned away--sent to cheaper hospitals, usually--but almost all of them get treated. In fact, it's a lot less trouble to treat someone who's really poor, because you don't have to worry about what his insurance will and won't cover.
The people who suffer are the middle-class and working-class folks who either don't have insurance, or have insurance that doesn't provide adequate coverage. They get treated too, mostly, but then they lose everything--all their savings, their house, their car. Some just declare bankruptcy right away. Others try to negotiate the uncovered expenses down to something that they can afford. Sometimes the hospitals write off the costs that can't be paid. Other times they don't. But in either case, they take everything the patient's got first.
But the patient does get first-rate care, before being financially ruined. Almost always.
I've worked 100 hour weeks before, but it wasn't so bad. It was during the dotcom boom, and they fed us every day. There was a pingpong table. Could have been worse. I wouldn't do it again, but now I'm old and just can't sit in a chair for that long.
@Xin Lu: I agree it's absolutely ridiculous to pay $200 for a band-aid, but do we really need another law to fix this problem for us? I have a different idea. Let's start a grass roots revolution. Every time you go to the hospital or the doctor, demand to see the prices prior to receiving treatment. When they give you one pill of your antibiotic and charge 3 times the copay for the remaining 2 weeks'pills, give it right back to them and stop by the pharmacy on your way home. Also, do you have any examples of government intervention increasing competition? My view is that it would definitely decrease it, but perhaps I'm wrong.
Well, I would like the government to mandate some kind of transparency into hospital bills. Right now they charge crazy prices for things like cough syrup just because they can. And yes, government intervention does increase competition in some cases. For example, monopolies are illegal and companies are prevented from getting too big. Big corporations also get broken up to spur on competition. If there is transparency into what the heck we are paying for then there would be more competition.
Japanese are notoriously workaholics. When I was in Japan, I asked one guy how come they are so rich and efficient. He told me that majority works like hell and they only stopped working and enjoyed vacation during Saturdays and Sundays which they "copied" from the Americans when stayed in their country after World War 2. Nevertheless most Japs still work more than 8 hours a day.
Here in my country (Philippines), where people enjoy a very close family ties, we don't like working for more than 8 hours and we feel that our company steals our quality family time if they want us to work more than 8.
To conclude, it matters what you value most..work or life? For me, I just tried doing blogs so that if this turns out OK, then I can quit my 8-5job and spend more time with family.
Yeah, Japan also has a 40 hour work week normally, but I think most people work more. In the case of my Indian coworkers they were putting in 80 hours a week pretty regularly. That's pretty bad.
Something I grew up with an just assumed was normal: combing your hair in the shower. I realize now that we had low water pressure and needed all the help we could get to rinse out shampoo/conditioner. It works somewhat like a squeegee to get the residue off.
Basic idea: Shampoo, rinse, and run your comb through your hair while rinsing to hurry along those suds. Similarly, after conditioning use the comb to hurry the conditioner out as you're rinsing. The comb won't do anything on its' own, and it's not a huge improvement, but it does help. I used that tip this weekend at our campsite.
As for Anne of comment 12: I have a similar shower setup, and I bought a Shut-off for hand held showers at Home Depot. Initially I bought it because I had a shower stall in my apartment, and I wanted a moment to pause and shave my legs :-)
The articles state 80 overtime hours per MONTH, which comes to about 20 overtime hours per week. As Zopper said, that's 60 hours a week, at least according to our standard of the 40-hour work week in the US.
I personally have no interest in working that many hours, but have plenty of work-loving friends who put in that kind of time. I really don't think that in itself is enough to kill a person.
I try to find a balance. I will gladly put in the overtime and weird hours (self employed), but not for huge periods of time with out unplugging for a day or 2. As it stands, my late August/early September is going to be INSANE so in mid August I'm treating myself to several days completely off (no voicemail, email or anything) and mountain biking.
I was just thinking about treatments for things like cancer (crucial and long-term, but not usually associated with an ER visit), and I just realized that I don't know how uninsured people in the US manage to pay for things like that. I know that there are a number of organizations that help people afford treatment, but I wonder how many people simply die from it rather than to have to pay for chemotherapy?
Yeah, my dad (and mum) actually worked in Canada for a while. My mother just missed the US, I think, and didn't want her kids to be grow up playing ice hockey and drinking Canadian beer... zing!
I believe that overtime is, technically, hours that you work outside of a normal, 40-hour work week. So, 80 hours of overtime would be 120 hours of work per week, leaving 48 hours per week for sleeping, eating, and relaxing.
Seems like a lot of the discussion is centered on the topic of health care costs in the US, while the original post--I believe--was raising the issue of access to insurance coverage.
The high cost of medical care is an tricky economic problem that may or may not be amenable to some interventions such as transparency of costs, malpractice reform, or making consumers have more "skin in the game."
But given the current high-price situation...here's my question: If we agree that human beings have a "right" to medical care (at least in critical situations), do we extend that to agree that human beings have a right to receive that medical care without bankrupting themselves and without becoming exposed to risk of financial ruin for the rest of their lives?
I think we should.
The system most developed countries have devised for dealing with this issue is insurance. In some countries the insurance is mandated, national in scope, and financed by taxes. But in the US, insurance is a private, for-profit system, and it is NOT a right.
In the US, the costs for treating catastrophic injury or illness are too high for all but the richest people to pay from their assets. This makes medical insurance a necessity if one wants financial security. In the US, once someone become ill, the current private, for-profit insurance scheme does not have any obligation to include that person in an insurance pool, leaving them open to the risk of financial ruin the next time they are afflicted by accident or illness.
What's needed is a system whereby all residents of our country are able to join some kind of insurance pool. This could be accomplished by providing a government sponsored insurance pool, or by some amount of regulation that requires insurance companies to find a way to include all comers. Or some combination. That's the task I'd like to see our legistlators take on.
The current system, where insurance is only available to the healthy (or the employed of certain firms), leaves too many open to bankruptcy at the next accident.
Yes, some people would end up paying more to help cover the expenses of other people. THAT'S THE WAY INSURANCE POOLS WORK. Everyone chips in some to cover the costs of those who are struck by calamity. It spreads the risk. If I never get sick or injured, money spent on health insurance was NOT wasted...it was spent to give me the peace of mind knowing that I would not be financially ruined if that bad luck had happened to me instead.
I agree with some points in this article, but i think that the government should do more to improve the transportation of its citizens and their quality of life.
I think that moving to places with better transportation is not something all of us can afford., If you live in a good community that your children love living in, it's hard to displace them in the middle of their lives.
I have gained about 3 mpg on my Honda Element by driving 65 mpg instead of 75 mpg). First, it only takes about 1½ minutes longer to get to work. I have lowered my risk for a speeding ticket. And though the return is marginal it amounts to $15/month, $180/year.
Jespard
@Elizabeth
The statement by somebody that "the majority of voters do not pay income tax" seems unlikely. It's probably true that somewhere between 30% and 40% of the potentially tax-paying residents of the U.S. pay zero income tax. But these are mostly poor and young, two categories that are among the least likely to vote. So, without documentation, we should regard the statement as right-wing hyperbole (to put it as gently as possible).
I actually have always had success with the phonecall as well as email. I even wrote about my free stuff here:
http://debtsmack.blogspot.com/2008/05/consumer-knows-best-aka-how-to-get...
hahaha morons
Sam acts as if this the way banks operate is some kind of secret that they don't want anyone to know about. If it's a secret, it is very poorly kept. The problem is that many Americans border on financial illiteracy. Many don't understand how compound interest works and many more do not know that making a 'spread' on money is the second oldest profession in history.
In the most simplistic terms, all financial institutions borrow short and lend long. They take your money and give you a short term interest rate (CD or savings account) and immediately lend the money out longer term at higher rates (car loans, mortgages etc.). The difference is between the two is the banker's profits. As long as the bank makes prudent loans with stringent guidelines (no interest only loans, all loans documented etc.), the system functions fairly well. Banks have always needed short term financing to be rolled over- deposits or credit must be replaced to keep the bank capitalized. In reality, the depositor has always assumed the risks right along with the bank. This is why there is FDIC because after the Depression people were afraid to put their money in banks and without depositors banks cannot make money.
So this is not a conspiracy. The US operates on what is called a 'fractional reserve system'. Banks must have only 10% or so of cash on hand at any given time- the rest is being put to work making the bank money. If there is a run on the bank, all your money isn't there and it never has been. The problem today is that insatiable greed and political corruption allowed the banks to run amok. With the help of Wall St, the Federal Reserve (which is really a private bank)and the federal government, the financial industry created the largest debt bubble in history and now we will all pay the price.
I am so glad you have written this article because it is such an emotional release for me. Both of my parents are currently being scammed by someone who claims to be or have inherited a great deal of money. I have pleaded with them for years that the businesses they invest in are fictitious but it is to no avail. This has torn my family apart, and I am the only child so no one to talk to about it. I am absolutely powerless to convince my parents. I have pleaded and pleaded and they think I shouldn't worry but the guy is a freak and moved in with them and gotten involved in their spiritual life. It is the saddest thing to see and one of the biggest things I never thought would have to face. Alzheimers runs in both my parents lines and it is their generation. Fortunately in our state there is a relatively new law where you don't have to prove cognitive defect to get an adult protective order. I don't know what good that will do. I can't do anything or I might get blamed on ruining their golden opportunity.
It's funny how people are just now figuring out that driving like an idiot is really not getting them anywhere, just more angry and pissing other people off in the process. I laugh at people who weave through traffic in their SUVs just to get to the next red light sooner. Then they complain about gas prices.
Why hurry all the time? We all get to the final destination, so you might as well enjoy the ride. ;-)
It's true what they say that too much of anything isn't good, even work. You definitely need to find a nice balance between work and the rest of life. Dude should have taken a long lunch.
I liked this post a lot. I have also been doing the same thing and, the funny thing is, I also noticed that it "feels like the 70s" when you drive at 55. It's kind of fun in its own way. Once you decide that you are going to do this, it's actually much less stressful than the other kind of driving because "beating" someone else on the road or, even, comparing yourself to other drivers on the road is not tempting anymore. That's because instead of judging yourself by comparing to others, I am getting a sense of accomplishment from driving the way I decided, at the speed I decided. If anything, now when someone passes me I'm not at all tempted to speed up and match them. Since I fully expect to be passed by 80% of the cars on the road, why bother? They can go ahead the way they want. They might be stressed or just a fast driver, or they might have a genuinely time-sensitive emergency (though probably not). In any of these cases, you can be perfectly happy letting them go by. Their passing you by almost even begins to seem like a confirmation of your success in sticking to your new driving habit. Sticking at 55 or 60 is automatically success in this mindset. I've also noticed that there seem to be more people out there like this lately, driving slower, and being more relaxed.
This is a tough question. I mean this guy in Japan was extreme. Who would EVER choose to work over living? I felt silly even writing that...
There are times when you have to work stupid amounts of hours. You have to have balance. Everyone's work is important. It pays bills and allows you to be who you are. Never put it in front of your life and always recognize the body's little hints that you may be overdoing it.
I just wrote a very good article on Temperance. I just wish this guy would have read it too.
I was a bitch driver too. Now I get books on CD, set the cruise and stay in the right lane. My commute takes a few minutes more (not many more). Many days I'm sad that I've arrived because I want to keep listening to the book. I barely notice all the speed demons in the left lane.
"All humans are more likely to waste any resource they don't see as their own. This is why government programs always grow to gargantuan size and are massively wasteful - there is no personal ownership. This is especially true since the majority of voters do not pay income tax."
I'm confused... Is that an exaggeration? How does that work?
I don't know how the income tax system works in the US. Here in Canada, most of us have to pay income tax (the amount depends on how much we earn). I do know we pay more on a whole than people in the U.S, though.
As was explained above, the poor do get treatment. Oh, a few get turned away--sent to cheaper hospitals, usually--but almost all of them get treated. In fact, it's a lot less trouble to treat someone who's really poor, because you don't have to worry about what his insurance will and won't cover.
The people who suffer are the middle-class and working-class folks who either don't have insurance, or have insurance that doesn't provide adequate coverage. They get treated too, mostly, but then they lose everything--all their savings, their house, their car. Some just declare bankruptcy right away. Others try to negotiate the uncovered expenses down to something that they can afford. Sometimes the hospitals write off the costs that can't be paid. Other times they don't. But in either case, they take everything the patient's got first.
But the patient does get first-rate care, before being financially ruined. Almost always.
Crap. So much for my reading skills.
I've worked 100 hour weeks before, but it wasn't so bad. It was during the dotcom boom, and they fed us every day. There was a pingpong table. Could have been worse. I wouldn't do it again, but now I'm old and just can't sit in a chair for that long.
@Xin Lu: I agree it's absolutely ridiculous to pay $200 for a band-aid, but do we really need another law to fix this problem for us? I have a different idea. Let's start a grass roots revolution. Every time you go to the hospital or the doctor, demand to see the prices prior to receiving treatment. When they give you one pill of your antibiotic and charge 3 times the copay for the remaining 2 weeks'pills, give it right back to them and stop by the pharmacy on your way home. Also, do you have any examples of government intervention increasing competition? My view is that it would definitely decrease it, but perhaps I'm wrong.
Well, I would like the government to mandate some kind of transparency into hospital bills. Right now they charge crazy prices for things like cough syrup just because they can. And yes, government intervention does increase competition in some cases. For example, monopolies are illegal and companies are prevented from getting too big. Big corporations also get broken up to spur on competition. If there is transparency into what the heck we are paying for then there would be more competition.
Japanese are notoriously workaholics. When I was in Japan, I asked one guy how come they are so rich and efficient. He told me that majority works like hell and they only stopped working and enjoyed vacation during Saturdays and Sundays which they "copied" from the Americans when stayed in their country after World War 2. Nevertheless most Japs still work more than 8 hours a day.
Here in my country (Philippines), where people enjoy a very close family ties, we don't like working for more than 8 hours and we feel that our company steals our quality family time if they want us to work more than 8.
To conclude, it matters what you value most..work or life? For me, I just tried doing blogs so that if this turns out OK, then I can quit my 8-5job and spend more time with family.
Cheers!
Sam
Yeah, Japan also has a 40 hour work week normally, but I think most people work more. In the case of my Indian coworkers they were putting in 80 hours a week pretty regularly. That's pretty bad.
Something I grew up with an just assumed was normal: combing your hair in the shower. I realize now that we had low water pressure and needed all the help we could get to rinse out shampoo/conditioner. It works somewhat like a squeegee to get the residue off.
Basic idea: Shampoo, rinse, and run your comb through your hair while rinsing to hurry along those suds. Similarly, after conditioning use the comb to hurry the conditioner out as you're rinsing. The comb won't do anything on its' own, and it's not a huge improvement, but it does help. I used that tip this weekend at our campsite.
As for Anne of comment 12: I have a similar shower setup, and I bought a Shut-off for hand held showers at Home Depot. Initially I bought it because I had a shower stall in my apartment, and I wanted a moment to pause and shave my legs :-)
The articles state 80 overtime hours per MONTH, which comes to about 20 overtime hours per week. As Zopper said, that's 60 hours a week, at least according to our standard of the 40-hour work week in the US.
I personally have no interest in working that many hours, but have plenty of work-loving friends who put in that kind of time. I really don't think that in itself is enough to kill a person.
I try to find a balance. I will gladly put in the overtime and weird hours (self employed), but not for huge periods of time with out unplugging for a day or 2. As it stands, my late August/early September is going to be INSANE so in mid August I'm treating myself to several days completely off (no voicemail, email or anything) and mountain biking.
I was just thinking about treatments for things like cancer (crucial and long-term, but not usually associated with an ER visit), and I just realized that I don't know how uninsured people in the US manage to pay for things like that. I know that there are a number of organizations that help people afford treatment, but I wonder how many people simply die from it rather than to have to pay for chemotherapy?
Yeah, my dad (and mum) actually worked in Canada for a while. My mother just missed the US, I think, and didn't want her kids to be grow up playing ice hockey and drinking Canadian beer... zing!
I believe that overtime is, technically, hours that you work outside of a normal, 40-hour work week. So, 80 hours of overtime would be 120 hours of work per week, leaving 48 hours per week for sleeping, eating, and relaxing.
I must be getting tired. Joanna, I was answering your question and I put in the wrong name (and spelled doctor wrong too! ha!)
Got to hand it to Philip... I've never paid this much attention to an article and it's comments before. I'm learning so much that I keep coming back!