If they can't people to work in their jobs, then they aren't paying enough. Simple as that.
Lol, refer back to my original comment...
If they can't people to work in their jobs, then they aren't paying enough. Simple as that.
Look at the arms race on campuses fancy dining halls, recreation facilities, single rooms etc... Campuses are way nicer than they were years ago. Not saying that's a bad thing it's the way things have moved towards. Cadillacs and Chevys both go down the road but the options on the Caddy raise the cost of it.
I think at least at isu engineers pay moreThis has to be part of it. Also, If I go to college to be say, a school administrator, why do I have to pay the same tuition as someone who is going into mechanical engineering? Does it cost the school the same to educate me as it does the future engineer?
I feel like as a millennial I pretty much have to get married to be any better off than I am now currently financially.
I had a friend who found his old Ubills (he’s a pack rat) this winter. Informed me that when we went to school it was 9k for tuition and room/board. I left school with $13.5k/debt. Had a job for all but the first year. Most at $3.75hour jobs. This was 90-94. Average of 27 years ago. The median starting wage for an Ag loan officer was 21k. I got an Ag Bus degree requiring 128 credits. 0 credits when I started.
My son starts this year in Ag bus. His room/board and tuition will be 19k area (2.8% area annual increase ave). Similar debt would be 37800. Similar wage would be 10.50/hour. I do not know what normal starting loan officer wage is. Son needs 120 credits to graduate and enters with 25 from just his HS classes that were free. Means 3 1/2 years taking a light load. He’s not positive of exactly what he wants to do for a living.
This doesn’t seem as daunting as I keep hearing. Sounds like general inflation.
Btw, I’m not exactly positive of what I would to do for a living. Also, I’m paying his way and he will have 0 debt.
Not a get off my lawn statement. I am struggling to see the insane cost of college in comparison to when I was there.
It would not make a difference in the per capita GDP statistics.
Healthcare is in GDP either way, no matter who pays for those benefits, either a single-payer like Canada, the various systems in Europe, or the combination of systems that we have in the U.S. that yes, is strongly employer-based with private insurance.
So no, the "free" healthcare in these other places does not mean their standards of living are any higher/lower than the numbers indicate based on the per capita GDP. Those places have more social benefits for the middle-class, but their middle-classes also pay more in taxes, especially through a national sales tax/VAT that we do not have.
How does the government get money, after all?
Explain to me how it is wrong or unamerican???? I guess professors, and universities are evil America haters. (Well some are) There is no logic in your arguments. You say people should be able to follow their dreams through educators, but the educators cannot make a good living.
I was talking about the banks and other companies making money off students getting an education. Mine were at 1.9%, interest did not start until I graduated. Today the rate is around 5-6%, and interest starts the minute the form is processed.
They get it through taxes, we both know that, but what they do not do in Canada or UK is share that with the middleman, the for profit insurance company.
YOU + Government healthcare = Canada and UK and the rest of the industrialized world .
You + insurance company + healthcare = The US system.
No middleman, means more money for healthcare instead of stockholders profits.
OhThe "rest of the industrialized world" is factually incorrect. Switzerland has an entirely private healthcare system. Nobody is covered by the Swiss government. France, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries usually have some sort of public "bare bones" system, yes, but most people in those countries purchase supplementary insurance, received the same through their employer, or have substantial out-of-pocket costs and high deductibles for outpatient and preventative care. Every country really has a unique system. The idea that we are an "extreme," when 50% of U.S. residents are on a government plan between Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, receiving exchange subsidies under ACA, or under the VA, is silly.
The extreme examples are the ones you bring up -- the UK with a nationalized healthcare sector (and the NHS is a mess) and Canada and its single-payer system.
Besides, health insurance profits are a pretty small part of total healthcare spending.
UnitedHealth Group is the largest private health insurance company in this country.
They have around 50 million enrolled, or around 1/3rd of the private market and 1/6th of the country (a little bit less than those, but rounding from 300 million not 330 million, but even that adjustment will not substantially affect the math you see below).
According to their SEC filings...
https://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/content/dam/UHG/PDF/investors/2018/UNH-Q4-2018-Form-10-K.pdf
2018 revenues = $226 billion
Earnings = $17.3 billion
"Earnings" is close enough to "profits" in this context.
That is a profit margin of 7.6% -- sound huge?
Well... assume the rest of the industry is operating on similar ratios and UnitedHealth Group is 1/3 of the private market. That gives you around...
= 17.3 * 3 = $51.9 billion in private health insurance profits
Call it $50 billion. A lot of money for a mere mortal, yes, but U.S. healthcare spending in a year is around $3.5 trillion, or $3,500 billion, so...
50 / 3,500 = roughly 1.5% of total healthcare spending
Our differences in per capita healthcare spending compared to Anglosphere and European neighbors is more like 15% to 25% or beyond that. The profit margins ascribed to health insurance companies (and even their operations) is pretty small.
I will note, too, that UnitedHealth Group's profit margins have basically doubled in the past four years, so the above is probably an aggressive estimate. It is probably less.
This meme that it is all in insurance profits is the most idiotic thing about any discussion of health insurance in this country. Insurance companies are doing the rather boring task of spreading risk over large risk pools, which is what insurance companies do, while making a relatively modest profit while doing it. The amount they are going to charge is mostly determined by the cost of the underlying care you are receiving. Healthcare in this country is expense because the care -- hospitals, clinics, staff, equipment, etc. -- are expensive, not insurance.
It is just more fun to think about greedy insurance salesmen stealing your money than thinking about your friendly nurse and doctor being the ones who are doing it.
Is there nonfactual meme about our economy that you do not believe...?
The "rest of the industrialized world" is factually incorrect. Switzerland has an entirely private healthcare system. Nobody is covered by the Swiss government. France, Germany, and the Scandinavian countries usually have some sort of public "bare bones" system, yes, but most people in those countries purchase supplementary insurance, received the same through their employer, or have substantial out-of-pocket costs and high deductibles for outpatient and preventative care. Every country really has a unique system. The idea that we are an "extreme," when 50% of U.S. residents are on a government plan between Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, receiving exchange subsidies under ACA, or under the VA, is silly.
The extreme examples are the ones you bring up -- the UK with a nationalized healthcare sector (and the NHS is a mess) and Canada and its single-payer system.
Besides, health insurance profits are a pretty small part of total healthcare spending.
UnitedHealth Group is the largest private health insurance company in this country.
They have around 50 million enrolled, or around 1/3rd of the private market and 1/6th of the country (a little bit less than those, but rounding from 300 million not 330 million, but even that adjustment will not substantially affect the math you see below).
According to their SEC filings...
https://www.unitedhealthgroup.com/content/dam/UHG/PDF/investors/2018/UNH-Q4-2018-Form-10-K.pdf
2018 revenues = $226 billion
Earnings = $17.3 billion
"Earnings" is close enough to "profits" in this context.
That is a profit margin of 7.6% -- sound huge?
Well... assume the rest of the industry is operating on similar ratios and UnitedHealth Group is 1/3 of the private market. That gives you around...
= 17.3 * 3 = $51.9 billion in private health insurance profits
Call it $50 billion. A lot of money for a mere mortal, yes, but U.S. healthcare spending in a year is around $3.5 trillion, or $3,500 billion, so...
50 / 3,500 = roughly 1.5% of total healthcare spending
Our differences in per capita healthcare spending compared to Anglosphere and European neighbors is more like 15% to 25% or beyond that. The profit margins ascribed to health insurance companies (and even their operations) is pretty small.
I will note, too, that UnitedHealth Group's profit margins have basically doubled in the past four years, so the above is probably an aggressive estimate. It is probably less.
This meme that it is all in insurance profits is the most idiotic thing about any discussion of health insurance in this country. Insurance companies are doing the rather boring task of spreading risk over large risk pools, which is what insurance companies do, while making a relatively modest profit while doing it. The amount they are going to charge is mostly determined by the cost of the underlying care you are receiving. Healthcare in this country is expense because the care -- hospitals, clinics, staff, equipment, etc. -- are expensive, not insurance.
It is just more fun to think about greedy insurance salesmen stealing your money than thinking about your friendly nurse and doctor being the ones who are doing it.
Is there nonfactual meme about our economy that you do not believe...?
Really, congrads to you. The group I was talking about are pulling down 7 figures and up per year. If that is you, great.
But when the medium income in the state is 57 K a year, that tells me many are not close to that group.
Education or technical training is what gets most people out of poverty. That or hit the lotto or sells illegal drugs on the side.
To not value an education is the one of the worst things we can teach our kids, even if you did not get one yourself.
I have to ask, do you actually understand the challenges that young adults face today? Yes, there may be similarities to what you may have faced in your life, but "similar" is not "the same". Time has moved forward and the world has changed. There are different caveats and wrinkles that may not have existed when you were younger.
I'm sure you had your tough times, as we all have to one degree or another. But don't write off the struggles that others face just because the the internet, or smart phones. Maybe try using a little empathy and try to relate, instead of trying to invalidate others with "back in my day" rhetoric.
All these studies and dozens more, same you are wrong.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org...lth-u-s-spends-disproportionate-amount-health
https://time.com/5197347/us-health-care-spending/
https://www.jhsph.edu/news/news-rel...ending-highest-among-developed-countries.html
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/st...h-care-with-worse-population-health-outcomes/
I feel like as a millennial I pretty much have to get married to be any better off than I am now currently financially.
On your second point, I absolutely believe there are as many "kids" that would rather live at home and enjoy a comfy lifestyle they couldn't otherwise afford as there are 27 year olds that are forced to do so. There is a labor shortage in this country, construction companies literally can't find enough young people to fill jobs. You may not get to work at your dream job but there are jobs out there that can get you out of the house.
I do not know if they are entirely wrong.
My great-grandparents faced wars, economic hardships, and infectious diseases we have long stopped worry about as serious matters that affect our day-to-day lives. Our standard of living and access to clean water, good food, information about the rest of the world are much higher than theirs, too, along with our ability to travel places and see the world.
Their great-grandparents were likely either packed into some industrial slum somewhere in a major European or American city and/or subsistence level farmers/peasants.
Yeah, I have it easy. Thanks ancestors.
What we call human society is the uneasy alliance between those who are living, those who are dead, and those who are yet to be born.