Beside the tornado's direct hit?
Tornado shelters are not exactly a novel idea.
Readit NewsDead Comment
Dead Comment
derekjdanserl commented on Amazon Facility Hit by Tornado youtube.com/watch?v=TbkBe... · Posted by u/kordlessagain
US healthcare is most definitely not free market.
As I said, a “free-market” solution isn’t even an option.
Your entire argument is based on the assumption that healthcare is a free-market which it is obviously not. The mechanisms of price discovery are not present to all players in the market. When there is an unbalance in information in any market it will always be detrimental to the player with less information. The way to fix the problem is to create a free-market.
My entire argument is based on the fact that a free-market healthcare system is not even an option. Frankly, a free-market economy of any sort is a utopian fantasy. Healthcare is just a useful case study of the problems.
> This is what happens when the buyer doesn't care what the price is because its not their money and the seller doesn't publish prices to allow comparison.
The norm in most systems (in developed states, anyway) is that the buyer doesn't care what the price is, to at least the same degree that they don't in ours. Yet they're all much cheaper than our system.
That’s right. But the employer-dependent health insurance arrangement in the U.S. was implemented as an alternative to the various political dynamics that regulate most countries’ healthcare systems and it has successfully done so.
The problem, in other words, is that a truly free-market healthcare system would be politically infeasible in a major first-world nation. So instead of a public healthcare system that would provide minimal healthcare services to all citizens, they tied it to employment, effectively moving it from the consumer market to the labor market. So this arrangement, like most neoliberal policies including Obamacare, has served merely to buy more time for the ruling class. And worst of all it has worked.
> Hospitals make ridiculous profit.
"It depends."
Non-trauma hospitals in affluent areas that perform lots of elective procedures make a lot of profit.
Trauma centers in less-affluent, usually urban or rural, areas that deliver emergency care almost always run at a loss, and are subsidized by city / state / federal funds to maintain capability.
Whether it’s hospitals, hosipital owners, doctors, or other healthcare industry benefactors, someone is making a killing beyond just the insurance companies. Ballooning administration is not only a cause but a symptom, which is why free market solutions can’t overcome the problem. Establishing new healthcare institutions will depend on the existing healthcare industry, which will expect the same profits or it won’t cooperate. There is no way around the fact that free-market healthcare is just deeply immoral and inhumane.
derekjdanserl commented on Why U.S. Infrastructure Costs So Much bloomberg.com/news/articl... · Posted by u/jseliger
Isn't a trade off for some efficiency worth things like living wages, safety, and quality standards at scale?
Especially since no amount of technology has lessened the amount that most of us (especially those doing these jobs being complained about) still have to work to earn a living.
derekjdanserl commented on Does Georgism work? Is land a big deal? astralcodexten.substack.c... · Posted by u/feross
Those are ten thousand paintings which the public cannot experience or enjoy! In many ways, the paintings are more precious, as they could go on worldwide tours, and be experienced by millions of people; most land has virtually no uniqueness, and cannot be shared.
See: Owning huge amounts of land is uniquely antisocial.
The point here is to maintain a society and some things must come first, namely material things which paintings are not. Of course, art history shows us time and time again the vital importance of material sustenance in creating and preserving works of art. If you really care about art, you have to care about the material foundations that make rich and meaningful social livelihoods possible.
Edit: it's kind of bonkers that pointing out the basic mechanics of technological progress is getting downvoted on a site like HN, where I imagine most of us are gainfully employed trying to do just this.
So much for humanity benefitting from technology. Instead of our workdays becoming fewer and shorter, a tiny number of people who don’t work at all will become richer while our lives become more alienated from our labor. This is the opposite of what we tell each other technology is supposed to accomplish. If it’s not a problem, why do we keep lying about?