Apple, Google Could Face Large Fines Under New UK Digital Consumer Bill

[weckart]

I have stage 4 cancer. I thank god that I live in the US rather than anywhere in Europe or Canada. The time between detection at a (free) screening exam and getting a first scan and seeing a surgeon was a little more than a week. I saw an oncologist a week after that. Chemotherapy started about 3 weeks from initial detection. First surgery was about 4 months after detection, which, given medical considerations of "how it works" was about as soon as possible. Hard to complain about any of that, compared to what I read about the NHS in the UK or Canada and their ridiculous wait times and hoops to see specialists. As for cost, insurance covered most of it. My total out of pocket cost, a little more than a year into it, has been a few thousand bucks, thanks to my private, for-profit insurance company. Big deal. It's way cheaper than having a huge portion of my income confiscated as taxes cover healthcare costs.

And if you lost your job and could no longer afford your private, for-profit insurance premiums and copays/deductions as has happened to thousands of other Americans, what then? This is just an example of devil take the hindmost as long as it isn't me.

 

[monstermash]

And if you lost your job and could no longer afford your private, for-profit insurance premiums and copays/deductions as has happened to thousands of other Americans, what then?

I'd switch to my wife's insurance.

 

[webkit]

And if you lost your job and could no longer afford your private, for-profit insurance premiums and copays/deductions as has happened to thousands of other Americans, what then? This is just an example of devil take the hindmost as long as it isn't me.

The U.S. has the "Affordable Care Act" (including comparable state-based versions) and Medicaid to help people who can't afford their insurance premiums. Depending on one’s income level, these programs offer low cost or even free healthcare plans. For seniors, there's Medicare.

 

[monstermash]

In fact it looks downright ruthless and I'm surprised you're not all living in a state of permanent fear at the possibility of losing everything through illness.

Actually, I'm more afraid of losing everything to taxes than anything else. Taxes are our biggest expense, BY FAR. For 2023, it looks like this for us:

 

[robbietop]

it is actually, government spending using tax revenue is socialism, we can argue weather it is better solution or not.

No, government spending using tax revenue is government spending.

Socialism is a Social Economic Model using government as an equalizer for the lower social economic strata to avoid lopsided economic outcomes where the higher income brackets control the markets and use the poor as both their labor pool and consumer market with impunity.

The government uses the law and tax revenue as a balancing scale to make sure the poorer economic strata can have protections from the possible exploitation of the capital controllers in the upper economic strata.

 

[OneBar]

The US pays far more per capita for healthcare with worse outcomes and lower life expectancy. The insurance companies add little to no value for the amount they skim. While there are stories about people in other countries waiting in line for elective procedures, that glosses over the fact that many Americans can't get in line to begin with. Also, in other countries, your place in line is based on medical need, not ability to pay. If you have a more urgent need, you go to the front of the line. Many Americans have to wait until it gets bad enough to warrant an emergency visit, which clogs up EDs and treatment is more costly. Even if you do get treated, if that treatment involves Rx, then we pay far more for pharmaceuticals than any other nation.

There is no line here. Not sure what you even mean. If I call a doctor to be seen, I don't have to wait months. Ever. For any procedure, for any reason.

Other countries guarantee basic healthcare for all their citizens using a number of mechanisms including socialized medicine (UK), single payer (Canada) or even private insurance (Germany, Switzerland, Israel). Citizens of those countries keep coverage, even if they lose their jobs. You can keep coverage in the US, provided you can afford COBRA. This is what corporations want however. People afraid to quit their jobs.

You are guaranteed basic healthcare here as well. You don't have to have insurance of any kind to be seen. My wife had major surgery while neither of us were insured. Quit listening to propaganda.

In any case, back to the original issue, having larger fines that actually cause some pain for corporations is a good thing. However regulations also have consequences. It means that companies may decide to delay adding products and features to a given market, or not enter a market at all. Then again, the "People's Republic of California" still has a rather strong economy, even given the "onerous" taxes, regulations, and real estate costs.

And yet people think penalizing Apple and Google will somehow cause competition to sprout. Mind boggling. California's economy is "strong" only in that they're heavily subsidized by the federal government. Otherwise they'd collapse under the weight of their incredible debt.

 

[_Spinn_]

i don’t buy into the logic of a global turnover being used for fines compared to just the UK activity seems excessive even it’s only 10%.

I was thinking the same.

 

[Mrkevinfinnerty]

Sunak annoucing that he is fining Apple two hundred pounds