With Reddit I think it's on purpose. They want to drive users to the mobile app. Maybe they aren't introducing bugs on purpose but not addressing them isn't a accident.
AFAIK it's even worse and want never really "meant" to be anything but it was a workaround of mandated salary caps to compete for workers. Pretty much every time someone tries to limit the market, unintended consequences result. We are still paying for this one.
The current situation is even worse than it might seem: Employers must provide the same plan options to all employees. A high-earner might prefer a more premium plan over a barbones, catastrophic coverage-only plan while a low-earner at the same company might prefer the extra cash in their pocket. Even if some of the cost of the premium plans is forwarded to the employee the cost to the employer is still higher and they must price that case into their calculation of the overall comp package. The market is more competitive, by definition for high-earners. So the employer will offer plans that cater to them. But this cost still impacts the comp package of the low earner.
For many years this dynamic has eaten up most raises to take home pay got low income earners. See: https://www.econtalk.org/mark-warshawsky-on-compensation-hea...
The article says that lower mobility is caused by insurance being coupled to your employer. Yes, you can get health insurance on your own but there are a lot of issues with quitting and getting your own insurance or even moving to a different employer. If you get your own insurance you don't get the same tax breaks employers get. They also have not bargaining power with the insurance. Your new insurance, at your new employer might not have your current doctor covered. There is so much at stake with changing health insurance that it's quite frankly a little scary. Nobody wants to risk accidentally not having coverage for a few weeks because you filled in some form wrong. So it's easiest to just stay at your employer who carries most of the cost and you keep what you have already.
Good article in general but such a misleading headline and framing. The problem, as described in the article's body, is employer-provided health insurance, not private healthcare.
I used to listen to No Agenda from episode 1 on. It literally was just John and Adam recording their regular phone calls, discussing dinners they had together, etc. Over time it became more and more of what I'd describe as a conspiracy podcast.
No Agenda, John and Adam will forever have a special place in my heart regardless of the show eventually putting me off. Adam was what first brought my attention to Second Life where I ended up randomly meeting my now wife. We ended up listening to early No Agenda during long car rides. During one of the episodes John and Adam talked about their visit to Chez Spencer near our home in SF. We checked it out and loved it and later had our wedding rehearsal dinner there. Thank you, John!
As an ESL person who has spoken English as their main language for two decades now I find this very interesting. The vast majority of my English has been spoken with my wife who used to be a marketing VP or in a professional context. Sometimes people complain about the ways politicians or corporate executives talk and I don't get it and to me it sounds totally normal because that's what I'm used to. Makes you wonder how ESL speakers will sound more and more like LLMs because that's a large part of their exposure.
Remember when the pre-GPT3 days when the main argument against AI alignment concerns was that "we simply won't let it out of the box"? So quaint in hindsight.
I like this general list and I would add a shift from harder punishment to increased likelihood of getting caught. This means more cops, more prosecutors, more judges, more public defenders, less jail. Studies have shown that higher likelihood of getting caught and getting punished is more significant than a harsher punishment. However, I understand that right now incentives and finances are misaligned for accomplishing this. Much of the catch and release happens because there are not enough public prosecutors or jails are full.
One of the big issues - assuming good intent - was the dismissing of existing expertise on where the issues really are and jumping to the assumption that everyone in the system is corrupt and ripping off the tax payer. A simplistic model that can feel satisfying to promote on social media but is obviously naive. Jennifer Pahlka has worked on making our government more efficient and gives a much more educated view on what the real issues are. It's always baffling to me how Musk has all the resources one could imaging but loves to talk out of his ass instead of getting himself the maximum-validated information available to argue anyone. https://cnliberalism.org/posts/podcast-making-government-mor...
I wonder why we aren't addressing the real problem which seems to be cops behaving completely unethically. Their job is about enforcing the system that codifies our societies agreed up and codified rules of ethics. They should be obsessed with this the same way people here obsess over system performance, correctness, etc! If we cannot trust them with the very basics of ethical behavior they are absolutely in the wrong job and there need to be very clear consequences.