logoalt Hacker News

fc417fc802 • yesterday at 7:57 PM • 1 reply • view on HN

> Do we add the average cost of employer-provided health insurance to US wages to keep the number comparable? What about those who self-insure?

Obviously yes, and obviously no. Just as we don't add the price of groceries or rent to wages unless the employer subsidizes those in which case obviously yes we must.

> What does the raw tax/burden tell you here in an international comparison?

It tells you how expensive it is to live there, relatively speaking. Obviously (as you note) that's only half of the discussion just as an expensive appliance might or might not be worth the premium to any particular individual. But you're wrong to dismiss it out of hand as you do. Just as it's disingenuous to dismiss the benefits of (for example) universal healthcare it is also disingenuous to attempt to derail discussion that focuses directly on total cost or effective tax burden or what have you.

What you are dismissing as a "nonsense number" of an "interest group" I would consider one of the most accurate and easily understood quantifications of total cost.


Replies

ethbr1 • yesterday at 9:06 PM

Imho, parent's point about attempting to quantify costs without balancing them against benefits is valid.

It's meaningless to say "Germans pay X, Americans pay Y" if the two receive completely different benefits in exchange for those rates.

Furthermore, the point that the German system would be paying to individuals if not to the government is somewhat disingenuous. There are a few options.

   1. The government doesn't do it, so private options do at some cost
   2. There's some government-private hybrid
   3. It's not done at all
An example would be parental leave. In the US, it largely doesn't exist to the European extent. Employers don't offer it. You can't buy insurance for it. It just doesn't exist. That's something Germans are getting for existing in the German system.
➕ show 1 reply