Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I mean the elephant in the room here is socialized healthcare, no? It costs less than our system, it breaks the tie of employment to healthcare that we labor under here in the states so people are more free to leave crappy jobs, which is only made better by a much more comprehensive social safety net overall. Irrespective of your own personal economic position, having a society that's ready to actually help people who need it vs paying them lip service at election time (or seemingly genuinely trying to kill them, depending your party affiliation) is going to make a massive difference in who's better off.

There are also other differences too, things like many more walkable cities, more modern infrastructure and public transit. I could go on.

Like I'm doing fine enough here but I wouldn't even kind of defend how we live over here. America is in many ways the international version of a person who makes a lot of money but is still check to check eating ramen most nights and playing video games because they spend it all on their hobbies and stuff. It's a way to live but I wouldn't call it a good one.




It's not even whether our healthcare is socialized or not. Our health insurance regulatory system is setup to be adversarial between insurers and providers. If we can break up that dynamic we'd see cost improvement even if we didn't move to an entirely socialized system.


I'm very curious how you propose we make two entities both of which are profit-driven non-adversarial.


I think we can all agree that the ideal is california-level compensation in Europe.


That exists in some sectors, e.g. the City of London.

Also, UK doctors are compensated at internationally competitive rates when compared to average national income, especially so if they work in private practice in London with international clients.




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

Search: