Hacker News Reader

Comment by monkmartinez | Hacker News Reader

Yeah! Let those men and women making $55k a year pay for their "arrest insurance!" /s

This is a terrible idea for so many reasons, I find it hard to believe it was brought up. Part of the reason why Doctors earn/charge so much is due to the insurance they must carry.

I am a first responder and I would gladly carry insurance if I was compensated for it. Taken one step further, I would now like to be compensated for the exposure to disease, injury, environmental toxins, and more. Maybe we should strike and show the public how much they get for $55k a year?

View on HN

This is a very emotion-based response to a rational post. I understand you are in the profession and it is important to you, but that shouldn't mean

> This is a terrible idea for so many reasons

So list some of the reasons, rather than just dismiss the idea.

> I am a first responder and I would gladly carry insurance if I was compensated for it.

So now it sounds like it isn't a terrible idea at all and you agree with it if compensated. The take away I get from this is "first responders are paid too little to be held responsible for their actions." Lots of professions are paid very little and are still held responsible for intentionally reckless or malicious behavior.

> I would now like to be compensated for the exposure to disease, injury, environmental toxins, and more.

Sure that's fine as well, but against has no bearing on a person being responsible for their actions. Again it sounds like a justification of "first responders don't have to be responsible for their actions because xyz other concern". And shouldn't your union be negotiating for compensation for these things?

To me it sounds like exactly a viable solution. First responders must carry insurance for extremely negligent or malicious behavior, and should have an increase in salary across the board to cover average insurance cost.

> $55k a year

This is actually a LOT. My mother who even has a PHD and works as a teacher only makes 16.8k per year.

it's not, it's slightly lower than the gdp per capita for the US.

Don't confuse mean with median. Someone earning the mean will be well above the median (i.e. earning more than most people) because the mean is skewed by the very well off.

I wasn't arguing that it was the mean, I was arguing that it's not a lot.

$55k is just under the median 'household' income ($59k), so it may not be a lot, but it's more than a lot of people have.

Median household income in the U. S. is $56K. In this case, the point stands...kinda.

But you're right, GDP isn't the way to measure, as GDP has been going up more than income. Which means someone is skimming, but that's a different discussion.

making $55k a year

Median household income in the U. S. is $56K.

So the person is making the same amount as the median 'household'.

if your mother has a PhD and only makes $17k/year, Its because she WANTS to in that She would rather do her job where she is at than move (geographically or career orientation-ally). People working fast food can make more than that.

Moving and finding a job in another country is not something trivial, especially if you get 17k/year.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com