this post was submitted on 03 Sep 2026
678 points (99.3% liked)

Work Reform

17598 readers
965 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] yenahmik@lemmy.world 52 points 3 weeks ago (6 children)

I'm pretty sure private insurance exists in most countries with universal healthcare.

[–] Dagnet@lemmy.world 21 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

I live in such a country and private insurance exists here, still finds ways to screw over customers. We need more CEO murders

[–] Sturgist@piefed.ca 9 points 3 weeks ago

Also it's bribes...ahem, sorry, lobby groups, are the reason why a lot of places with universal healthcare are letting those systems crumble.

[–] Dave@lemmy.nz 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I live in a country with free healthcare and private health insurance. I even have private health insurance. But I have it through a nun-profit organisation that pays out ninety-something cents in claims for every dollar of premiums paid. So I'm ok with it.

[–] kestrel7_7@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

nun-profit organisation

Is that some kind of Catholic thing? 🥁🐍

[–] Rothe@piefed.social 11 points 3 weeks ago

It does. Basically all countries with universal healthcare also have a private healthcare sector. It is another ironic fact that countries with universal healthcare has more freedom of choice than people have with the American healthcare system.

[–] BillyClark@piefed.social 8 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

In America, we don't learn from watching others. Hell, we don't even learn from our own mistakes.

Come to think of it, we barely even learn in the first place.

[–] Flower@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 weeks ago

Learning would imply Doing Things Differently and we can't have that now can we?

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 weeks ago

It does, and it's the first step in destroying national health care.

[–] Taalnazi@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago

It does, in the Netherlands (my country), we have universal private healthcare.

We used to have universal public/singlepayer, but decades of liberal governance caused it to be privatised.

[–] MisterFrog@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah, and it's a scourge in those places too

[–] Alexstarfire@lemmy.world 34 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Don't forget that it also makes procedures more expensive for some reason. So until to reach your deductible you're paying more than someone who pays cash.

[–] devedeset@lemmy.zip 3 points 3 weeks ago

The reason is the overhead. If you have 100,000 healthcare providers that have to figure out how to work with 100 insurance companies, they all have to figure out how to work with each other, which costs a whole bunch of money.

[–] Lor@mander.xyz 14 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

private insurance still exists for the very rich or as supplemental insurance.

[–] FluidBeef@quokk.au 14 points 3 weeks ago

We still have private in Europe. It just has to compete against going on a waiting list, instead of against other providers who overcharge and refuse treatment.

[–] minorkeys@sh.itjust.works 12 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

But there is in every other developed nation. But to America, the rest of the world doesn't matter so....

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

NYT is lying. Prior to FDR the entire healthcare profession was not for profit. He and Nixon allowed for the privatization and profit extraction to be allowed.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

the entire healthcare profession was not for profit

Yeah I'm gonna need a source on this one because my knowledge of history points to this being entirely untrue outside of charity which... wasn't exactly great care.

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You learn something new everyday.

"The US health insurance industry originated from a non-commercial plan founded during the Great Depression by a hospital in Dallas, Texas, seeking to shore-up its finances.45 That plan led to non-profit Blue Cross plans, which once dominated in most regions of the USA.45 However, in the mid-20th century, investor-owned insurers began outcompeting Blue Cross plans. "

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0140673625016691

Hospitals were all pretty much non-profit and many are to this day. Many doctors did have private practices though.

[–] Jax@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thank you for the good information. I meant to say this yesterday but was distracted.

[–] Hikermick@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Where does it say anything about being not for profit?

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Should be MediCAID for all. But, they've pushed MediCARE for all as a negotiation.

A lot of people don't know the difference.

[–] CorneliusTalmadge@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Came here to point this out because it seems to always be missing from the conversation:

MEDICARE IS NOT FREE!

It currently costs $202.90 a month for the lowest income bracket and only covers 80% of the cost.

The amount you pay is adjusted based on income. And since it only covers 80% guess what you need? That’s right a second private insurance plan to cover the remaining 20%.

Unless you are on Medicaid which pays the $202.90 and covers the 20%. But not everyone who is on Medicaid even qualifies for this full assistance. A lot people on Medicaid only get partial assistance.

The entire system is a huge scam made by corporations, and even they are like this is unsustainable. Because you can’t have an insurance plan where everyone on it is going to die in the next 10-15 years. The pool of money is too small, and there is no risk to insure against, because people 65 and older are all but guaranteed to get sick and then die. This is why Medicare was even created because the private market wouldn’t insure older people.

[–] myyass@lemmy.world 8 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

Even before Obama care, it was actually a better system but not much changed afterwards, Vermont had probably the closest thing I've seen to something like NHS. It was an income based health insurance. Free, or in my case $25 a month. I didn't get it since I wasn't financially well off at the time.

Then I break my leg while unemployed. EMS ride, 1.5 Million dollar surgery, in home nurse that visited, a physical therapist that visited, checkups, x rays, etc. Total cost for me? 13 cents for the pain pills after surgery. It was surreal to just go to the hospital and pay nothing.

I'm SO happy with how insurance is where I live now that I carry an AFAK with me to work in case I get hurt. Heh, food poisoning is like a national hobby now, last year I had it bad, fell over and hit my head, had a nice gash, I just said let me sleep it off.

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Even before Obama care, it was actually a better system but not much changed afterwards

Obamacare was crap , and a massive giveaway to the private insurance industry (though, it was not Obama who killed the Public Option, that honor goes to Joe Lieberman), but in no universe was it a better system before that.

[–] myyass@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

I don't disagree. VT's system was miles better without the intervention.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 4 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Vermont had probably the closest thing I’ve seen to something like NHS.

Bernie perhaps?

[–] myyass@lemmy.world 4 points 3 weeks ago

I mean the English National Healthcare System. But yeah Bernie is pretty cool, it's a shame he didn't become president. I love Vermont but -40 degree weather is kinda rough. The cold totaled my car the first year there lol

[–] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

We need to call the institutional capitalists' bluff. Tell them single payer is a great way to prove capitalism works AND that private insurance is needed!

Create a public single payer option, and we'll all marvel as private health insurance companies innovate and justify their existence by creating better, cheaper insurance products that we can decide to buy as a demonstration of the invisible rational hand of the market! Competition! That's why we need a single payer option! If you aren't for public insurance, you don't believe in capitalism!

[–] veroxii@aussie.zone 3 points 3 weeks ago

Isn't getting to a monopoly the ultimate capitalist goal? Grow until you corner the whole market. So if that winner happens to be the government's "insurance"... Peak capitalism.

[–] devedeset@lemmy.zip 7 points 3 weeks ago

Oh no, my freedom of choice to pay for whatever the 2 plans my employer offers

[–] Bluedragon012@lemmy.world 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

If you don't, we'll kill the industry by other means.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Bluedragon012@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

It's Weegee time

[–] itsBlorpinTime@feddit.online 4 points 3 weeks ago

But there's plenty of precedent in modern world history. I hate the way America is.

[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

A general health insurance does not rule out private health insurance at all. They can cover things the normal insurance does not.

[–] heartSagan5@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 weeks ago

Canadians often have to buy traveler's insurance when visiting the US. There would be a market for private insurance, I'm sure.

[–] Raiderkev@lemmy.world 3 points 3 weeks ago

To think, no one would feel the sense of pride and accomplishment that comes with hitting your deductible.

[–] Feathercrown@lemmy.world 2 points 3 weeks ago

"Yeah they... the tend to do that"

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 1 points 3 weeks ago
[–] lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

I did not read the article. However, a statement like "there is no precedent" is value-neutral. Maybe they are saying it is a good thing?