Comment by Nogwater | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Nogwater | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Does it baffle you that the school location for your kids is so tied to where you live?

No. Kids need to get to school, often by walking/biking. Schools can't afford to bus random kids in from 100 miles away. At least where I live (Ventura County, CA) parents are able to drive their kids to more distant schools if they prefer. As long as schools are a physical location where you have to show up to benefit from, it makes sense for them to be location based. If schools were 100% online, then it wouldn't make sense.

> Does it baffle you that your employer decides how much it wants to pay you as well ... desk ... computer ... 401k ... bonus ... vacation ... etc...

All of those things are either related to the relationship between you and your employer. The 401k thing is a little funny. I'd rather take the cash and manage it myself. I'm assuming your point is that health care plans are just another form of compensation and if you don't like what's offered, quit and work somewhere else that offers something better. The problem is that 1) coverage chosen by the employer can change every year, 2) you can't get the same coverage at the same price on your own or at a small company, and 3) it's non-optimal because it bundles unrelated things and requires you, as a "consumer" of employment, to make your decisions based on the aggregate value instead of individual values of the components.

> Let me ask you though. What if your employer would give you the money they put toward your health care to choose the provider of your choice (even if you had to pay the difference for any shortcoming)?

That seems good to me as long as you had the option to buy the same coverage at the same rates as the big companies.

> Schools can't afford to bus random kids in from 100 miles away

This is my point... Affordability is the reason in both cases so I don't understand how this is so easy for you to understand with schools and so baffling with Employer paid health insurance. Do you thing that your HR dept could manage 100 different health care providers? do you think all the providers that you may wish to use are affordable to your company?

>All of those things are either related to the relationship between you and your employer. The 401k thing is a little funny. I'd rather take the cash and manage it myself. I'm assuming your point is that health care plans are just another form of compensation and if you don't like what's offered, quit and work somewhere else that offers something better. The problem is that 1) coverage chosen by the employer can change every year, 2) you can't get the same coverage at the same price on your own or at a small company, and 3) it's non-optimal because it bundles unrelated things and requires you, as a "consumer" of employment, to make your decisions based on the aggregate value instead of individual values of the components.

Money is a finite thing to your company and I just don't understand how you are baffled that you can't choose whatever health care you wish through your company. Whats more - with ObamaCare, you will still not be able to choose whatever health care provider you want so I don't see how you think that this will help you.

> Do you thing that your HR dept could manage 100 different health care providers? do you think all the providers that you may wish to use are affordable to your company?

Ah, I see where the confusion is coming from. I'm not arguing the the employer should allow you to choose whatever health care provider that you want. I'm saying that I don't understand why they're involved in the process at all.

I don't know if health coverage should be like eating at a restaurant (entirely optional and up to the consumer), like car insurance (required, but you buy it yourself), like the military (you have to pay for it through taxes and have no control over it), like lower education (required and you can go with the government option or pay for a private option out of pocket), like higher education (optional and you can go public or private), etc..., or some sort of combination. At this point, I'd probably lean towards health coverage being required, provided for free for poor people, available through the government(s) for everyone else, and a voucher system for anyone who wants to get it privately (with a regulated level of coverage). All of this would have to be funded through taxes (probably a combination of corporate and personal taxes), but employers wouldn't have to manage it at all.

Based on other comments, I understand why the situation is what it is today (because of tax benefits to both the employer and employee), but I don't understand why it should be this way.

> with ObamaCare, you will still not be able to choose whatever health care provider you want so I don't see how you think that this will help you.

I didn't mention ACA/ObamaCare (maybe you're thinking of someone else?), and don't have much of an opinions on it other than it's so full of compromises that it's unlikely to make anyone happy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com