[HN Gopher] I might have gone a little bit overboard
___________________________________________________________________
I might have gone a little bit overboard
Author : saimiam
Score : 209 points
Date : 2021-07-05 15:18 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (dirtydatagirl.moogle.cc)
(TXT) w3m dump (dirtydatagirl.moogle.cc)
| lifeisstillgood wrote:
| I think I like her.
|
| https://www.willowfinch.com/ seems to be the start-up that this
| article founded (or is the story of how she got there)
|
| It seems to be a fairly sensible idea - cost-of-living is not
| just how much a house in Rural "Southern State" costs but varies
| based on house price + Other State laws and Taxes + mostly
| healthcare stuff non_US folks dont understand + othr variables
| based on your stage of life (young and single vs young family
| etc.)
|
| So her startup helps people find best part of the country to live
| in based on all those variables.
|
| Which sounds awesome, if only most people did not base their
| location on a job.
|
| Which after COVID means this is a really good time to start that
| start up.
| dominotw wrote:
| how do i use this website. Don't see any signup button.
| jonnydubowsky wrote:
| I couldn't figure it out either. If anyone has successfully
| used the Willowfinch.com site, how do you get started?
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| >Which sounds awesome, if only most people did not base their
| location on a job.
|
| I would say family/friends even takes priority, as many people
| give up economic/political benefits of moving elsewhere to stay
| closer to their network.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| A tool that compares cost of living in high resolution could be
| useful for comparing relocation options.
|
| However, I have my doubts that many retirees are interested in
| evaluating retirement destinations solely on cost of living
| requirements. Nearly everyone wants to retire to some place
| they enjoy which is close to their friends and family. Moving
| across the country to save a few hundred dollars per month
| isn't helpful if you spend thousands of dollars more every year
| on plane tickets to travel back to see friends and family.
| burnished wrote:
| Could be useful for a group of people, say a family, to help
| decide where they should settle down.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| Look at the costs at borders between states. If you have
| family in Danville, IL, you might want to retire in Attica,
| IN
| EdwardDiego wrote:
| As a non-US folk I definitely don't understand that health
| insurance variance.
|
| Presumably, as she mentioned ACA, you're getting the same level
| of service, so how can it vary by state? I thought ACA was
| federal level?
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| ACA is at the federal level, but it allows pricing healthcare
| based on 3 things: location, age, and smoking status.
|
| And up until ACA, all health "insurance" was administered
| state by state, with various additional state laws and
| compliance with state insurance regulators, so instead of
| dismantling all that, it was mostly left alone as long as it
| complied with the ACA minimums.
|
| Healthcare providers charge very different amounts in very
| different places, due to reasons such as doctors wanting more
| money for having to live in less desirable areas, so it makes
| sense that it would cost more or less in different places.
|
| Also, the "risk pool" is restricted to each state due to
| aforementioned system of regulating insurance state by state,
| so states with smaller populations have less lives to spread
| the healthcare costs around. This means that healthcare costs
| in smaller states could be lower, if everyone is healthier,
| but more likely is something like the case of Iowa where a
| single anemic patient caused an insurer to back out of the
| state since their healthcare costs were so high it was not
| profitable to operate in the state (until the Iowa
| government, i.e. rest of Iowa taxpayers, stepped in to help.)
|
| Some of this is also due to political compromises during ACA
| passage that continued to allow employers to silo their
| employees' into their own risk pools via employer sponsored
| health insurance, and a lot of these are the healthier lives
| that would help shoulder the healthcare costs of the "general
| public".
| senortumnus wrote:
| Look up the share of health care spending that goes to
| doctors. It's maybe 6-10% of overall costs. (Often reported
| as share that goes to "doctors and clinics" ~20% which
| includes salaries of nurses & other workers, etc) Biggest
| share goes to hospitals.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| Everyone else involved has similar cost of living
| requirements.
|
| Even the cost of buildings and supplies varies with
| location.
|
| Doctors were just an example.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| That was just one easy example that came to mind, since
| there is specifically a federal program that exists to
| get doctors to go where they do not want to be.
| Obviously, nurses/janitors/hospital management will want
| more/less to live in certain areas, and maybe that is
| offset by lower land costs, utility costs, legal costs
| depending on state's laws and courts, and there is a
| whole host of factors that can cause differences between
| two places.
| bufferoverflow wrote:
| Different laws, different levels of health problems.
| machinerychorus wrote:
| ACA is a federal level law that does several different
| things. As I understand it, the main points were increased
| insurance regulation, the individual mandate, and an option
| for states to expand medicaid [0]. I'm not sure why there is
| so much state-to-state variance, but afaik the aca wouldn't
| prevent that.
|
| [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_Care_Act
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The main point of ACA was removing the ability for managed
| care organizations (MCOs, or health insurers) to refuse or
| price one's premiums based on the probabilities of their
| future healthcare costs. This is why I prefer the term MCO,
| as they are no longer selling just insurance, so the term
| insurer does not seem apt.
|
| ACA introduced rules that effectively make health insurance
| premiums a tax, where the young and healthy pay for the old
| and sick (like taxpayer funded healthcare). It did so in a
| few ways:
|
| 1) force MCOs to provide insurance to everyone, by removing
| pre existing conditions as a criteria for pricing insurance
| (effectively causing healthy people to subsidize sick
| people)
|
| 2) force everyone to buy insurance (although this got
| neutered, both by removing individual penalty and allowing
| employer sponsored plans to continue to exist)
|
| 3) pricing is only based on age, location, smoking status
|
| 4) pricing is such that highest premium can only be 3x the
| premium of ages 21 to 24, effectively causing young people
| to subsidize old people
|
| 5) out of pocket maximums for in network providers - this
| leaves in the true insurance part of the business in that
| you will not have to pay over a certain amount in a
| calendar year.
|
| https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/out-of-pocket-maximum-
| li...
|
| >I'm not sure why there is so much state-to-state variance,
| but afaik the aca wouldn't prevent that.
|
| Because insurance regulation is still at the state level,
| and MCOs were allowed to use location as a factor in
| calculating premiums, so different places in the US have
| different healthcare costs due to factors such as wages,
| land costs, liability costs. Although this mostly exists on
| the state level, I do not think it gets more granular than
| that.
| sidlls wrote:
| The main thing ACA does is help shift even more money from
| people to health insurance companies. Any other benefits
| are ancillary or completely accidental.
| EricE wrote:
| 1. The US is huge. Good example that blew my mind:
| https://www.txmemes.com/post/texas-is-larger-than-any-
| europe...
|
| 2. Economic variables can vary significantly between regions
| 3. There are artificial barriers that significantly distort
| the market for health care - the most egregious being
| prohibitions on insurance across state lines that create
| artificial silos. The overhead of insurance companies and
| people using insurance for all health care instead of just
| providing coverage for catastrophic needs inflicts bloat and
| overhead on even the most mundane of transactions. I've
| switched to a high deductible plan with a health savings
| account that lets me pay for my health care tax free so I
| negotiate with cash for the vast majority of my health care
| needs and let me tell you - the difference vs. going through
| insurance is eye opening. On top of that I no longer have to
| look for providers who are in network - I can pick whoever I
| want for whatever reason I want. Yup, it takes a bit more
| effort - but it's my freaking health. There are few things
| more important or worth dedicating effort to.
| ryandrake wrote:
| It looks interesting, but how do you actually get into and use
| the tool? The home page has lots of words describing it and a
| video, but I could find no links to the actual tool.
| jefftk wrote:
| There's a lot going on in this post, and it's not the most
| structured, but the graph of healthcare costs by county at age 59
| was fascinating:
| https://s3.amazonaws.com/mx.sairamachandr.in/moogle.cc/blogp...
|
| ("This map of the 2018 2nd Cheapest Silver ACA plans shows the
| variance against the cost for 2 people, aged 59, with King
| County, Washington as the base. The olive green color is zero-ish
| variance. The darker the green, the cheaper the health insurance
| is in that county. The darker the red, the more expensive that
| county is compared to King County, Washington.")
| mumblemumble wrote:
| I'm having a hard time interpreting that because I don't know
| enough about the Affordable Care Act. Is this making an apples-
| to-apples comparison? Are Silver ACA plans roughly comparable
| in terms of quality of coverage?
|
| One anecdotal experience in this area for me is that my
| employer recently switched health insurance companies on us. On
| paper, the new plan is equivalent to the old plan, but
| appreciably less expensive. In reality, I would _gladly_ pay
| even more than the old plan cost, just to go back to it. And
| probably save money (certainly be able to hold onto my hair
| color a bit longer) in the process.
| burnished wrote:
| Can you qualify why specifically you would prefer the old
| plan even though it is 'on paper' the same?
| mumblemumble wrote:
| What lotsofpulp and Judgmentality describe pretty much
| covers it.
| Judgmentality wrote:
| Not OP, but switching providers could mean one actually
| provides coverage and the other regularly denies it. I have
| upgraded health plans in the past, only to discover I spent
| more time fighting my insurance company because they just
| refused to honor the coverage. I actually had to get a
| lawyer involved at my own expense.
|
| I find it bizarre how many people just trust that insurance
| companies will actually honor their contracts. In my
| experience, they likely won't. This is just my anecdote.
| shoemakersteve wrote:
| As a non-American, that sounds pretty fucked.
| sdenton4 wrote:
| The American healthcare system is quite fucked.
| Proponents are typically profiting from it directly, have
| no idea what things are like in other places, or
| suffering Stockholm syndrome (and lack access to medical
| care to treat it).
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| It is not as bad as it sounds. There is an appeals
| process:
|
| https://www.healthcare.gov/appeal-insurance-company-
| decision...
|
| And in general, anything the insurance company might not
| want to pay for required a "prior authorization", which
| usually happens if the insurance company's doctors think
| there is another option for treatment or the proposed
| option does not have sufficient evidence.
|
| I imagine there is similar processes in taxpayer funded
| healthcare systems too to properly allocate resources.
| Although, I am sure there are many cases of problems
| caused by insurance companies in the US, due to the
| bureaucracy.
| ThePowerOfFuet wrote:
| It really is as bad as it sounds.
|
| >I imagine there is similar processes in taxpayer funded
| healthcare systems too to properly allocate resources.
|
| What the doctor orders is what you get. You can typically
| choose your doctor, as well as get a second opinion. The
| doctors are generally paid the same.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| These are some pharmacists talking about prior
| authorizations for medicine, and they seem to exist in
| Canada, UK, AUS, and NZ.
|
| https://www.reddit.com/r/pharmacy/comments/oekhrp/curious
| _ab...
|
| I would be surprised if any country gave doctors blank
| checks for everything since no one has unlimited
| resources. There most likely is a system for figuring out
| where waste is happening and avoiding it.
| canadianfella wrote:
| > On paper, the new plan is equivalent to the old plan, but
| appreciably less expensive. In reality, I would gladly pay
| even more than the old plan cost, just to go back to it. And
| probably save money (certainly be able to hold onto my hair
| color a bit longer) in the process.
|
| I don't understand what you are saying here.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Yes, the same metal level plans are comparable since the
| coverage all health insurance has to provide is the same in
| the US (excluding the weird church plan loophole but they are
| not actually insurance and no one uses them)
|
| https://www.healthcare.gov/choose-a-plan/plans-categories/
|
| What will change is the network of healthcare providers that
| are in network for you. This is how I think price
| discrimination will work in healthcare in the US going
| forward.
|
| A more expensive silver health insurance will have more
| doctors in network since it will reimburse at a higher price
| (from your or your employer's higher premiums). A less
| expensive silver health insurance will have fewer doctors in
| network, since fewer doctors will accept that price. Or it
| will have overworked doctors, or you will have to see nurse
| practitioners or physician's assistance instead of MDs.
|
| If you find your employer's in network doctors worse, then it
| is basically a stealth pay cut from one perspective.
| [deleted]
| rob74 wrote:
| "it's not the most structured" is an understatement - to me it
| feels like some kind of "stream of thought" writing, where
| someone just writes down everything that comes into their mind.
| The result of that is comprehensible to the person who wrote
| it, but really hard to follow for anyone else. So, if she
| really wants to promote the service she built based on this,
| the article could use some editing...
| sundvor wrote:
| I found it interesting to follow the thought process, and
| enjoyed the read myself.
|
| It struck me that energy costs (which involves location etc)
| weren't included, but perhaps that's in the final service?
| [deleted]
| dgb23 wrote:
| If the author is reading this:
|
| The first (oldest) post on the blog index is still a Moogle
| tutorial/example post. I suggest to delete/unpublish it.
| causality0 wrote:
| Is there like another section to this writeup? Because the
| priorities seemed quite strange and incomplete to me.
|
| _And were there any "Blue Dots" in the sea of red around where
| she lives?_
|
| I can't figure out what her aim is with this. Is the proposition
| that she'll have an easier time making friends in a city that's
| 60% Democrat as opposed to 40%? Same thing with the dry county
| issue. Is an extra five minutes in the car to the next county
| over even noticeable?
|
| So many more significant things are ignored. Does she like the
| weather in these places? Do she or her husband have significant
| allergies to the sources of pollen native to the properties?
| vehemenz wrote:
| It depends on the state, but a pocket of blue in rural/exurban
| areas often indicates lower crime, better public services, etc.
| --more educated people and the accompanying externalities.
| Driving to the next county over doesn't solve the problem of
| bad neighbors.
| liveoneggs wrote:
| the article highlights Clarke Country, home of Athens, home
| of UGA (a massive college town)
| llampx wrote:
| Democrat counties have lower crime rates? Doesn't follow from
| Democrat cities like NYC and Chicago.
| rblatz wrote:
| Seems like you missed the qualifier of rural/exurban which
| immediately excludes NYC and Chicago.
| jbeam wrote:
| NYC in 2021 is very different from NYC in the 1980s.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| And it often means the opposite, so it's useless data in
| summary.
| pavel_lishin wrote:
| > _Same thing with the dry county issue. Is an extra five
| minutes in the car to the next county over even noticeable?_
|
| It might be if the next county over has noticeably better roads
| because of the extra taxes due to alcohol sales.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > Is the proposition that she'll have an easier time making
| friends in a city that's 60% Democrat as opposed to 40%?
|
| In rural areas that distinction actually matters.
|
| > Same thing with the dry county issue. Is an extra five
| minutes in the car to the next county over even noticeable?
|
| When your county is wet, you don't need a car to get to the
| nearest pub or can hail an Uber for cheap to get home.
| skywhopper wrote:
| Uber doesn't operate in the vast majority of the country,
| even in small cities (although there's usually _some_ variety
| of taxi service, but usually not as easy to use or as
| comfortable). You may also be overestimating the availability
| of "pubs" even in "wet" counties in places like Kentucky.
| alisonkisk wrote:
| People just drive drunk in Uberness areas. Low population
| density means low enforcement.
| bsagdiyev wrote:
| That wet/dry distinction might not be as big of a deal as you
| make it still depending on county size. North Carolina has
| 100(!!) counties, with only one dry still, at that size and
| with the typical spread between places you easily pass
| through a couple of counties daily just doing normal day-to-
| day stuff. For example, I live in Wake County but my grocery
| store is in Harnett County and my Best Buy is in Johnston
| County, all still within a 20 minute drive.
| rsynnott wrote:
| I mean, I would imagine that many people might like to be
| able to walk to a pub (_driving_ to one doesn't seem like a
| great idea...) If alcohol sales are verboten in the county,
| this seems problematic.
| bsagdiyev wrote:
| Where in the US do you live that a bar would be walking
| distance and also next to a dry county? All urban areas
| like that threw out those sorts of laws decades ago.
| Rural areas are typically where dry counties are found,
| but not always, but walking to a bar in the US is
| typically reserved for more built up areas (but once
| again not always)
| rsynnott wrote:
| I don't live in the US. Where I live, though, even in
| many rural areas walking into the local village would be
| feasible. There'd be _very_ rural places where you
| couldn't walk to anything, but they'd be the exception.
| datameta wrote:
| As an urbanite I was looked upon like a madman when I
| walked 30 minutes to the store from my academic campus
| which was hugged by a nature reserve on one side and a
| major highway on the other. Not having a car is a real
| hassle in the majority of the non-urban areas of this
| country. The only other people who thought to ever do
| something similar were international students from
| Bulgaria and Nepal that didn't blink twice at it.
| ricardobeat wrote:
| In most of European cities a 30 minute walk gets you over
| to the next town, not the nearest pub :)
| TheGigaChad wrote:
| From where did you pull this one out? Your ass?
| datameta wrote:
| In NYC 30 minutes later you're maybe one or two
| neighborhoods down ;)
| Causality1 wrote:
| Matters how? I've lived in both Left and Right-leaning towns
| over the past five years and didn't notice a difference. I
| don't have children, is it something that would only matter
| to a parent?
| baryphonic wrote:
| > Do she or her husband have significant allergies to the
| sources of pollen native to the properties?
|
| Seems she has allergies to the Republican neighbors native to
| the properties.
| kcmastrpc wrote:
| I mean, who doesn't want to live in wealthy, low-crime areas?
| liveoneggs wrote:
| you might not have a super accurate view of rural georgia
| surrounding the UGA Athens area
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Me. Those areas are boring and soulless.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| Aeolun wrote:
| I think the most important observation of this article is that
| health insurance trumps literally all other costs.
|
| How do people even live with health insurance that costs $2000
| per month?
| war1025 wrote:
| I calculated last year that for my family of 5, our health
| insurance premiums (when you include the portion my employer
| pays) equaled almost to the dollar the amount we spent on every
| other thing last year.
|
| Granted we are pretty frugal, but health insurance is insane.
| WYepQ4dNnG wrote:
| Well, that's why you need at least $1M (stressing at least) to
| retire in US. That's insane!
| 1123581321 wrote:
| You only need that if you want to live beyond what Social
| Security and public assistance provide.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| The purchasing power of social security benefits has been
| going down for many, many years. I predict it will continue
| to go down and become more means tested as the proportion
| of working to not working population goes down.
|
| I assume social security will just be a nice bonus if I get
| it in the 2050s.
| 1123581321 wrote:
| Social Security payouts have been adjusted upward for
| inflation almost every year since 1975. You can see the
| data here: https://www.ssa.gov/oact/cola/colaseries.html
|
| There are no plans to discontinue this practice. Many
| people believe SS will not be meaningfully available to
| them at retirement decades from now, which is
| understandable skepticism, but is not a reflection on how
| retirement is intended to work in the US.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| Those inflation statistics have no bearing on my
| experienced expenditures over the course of my life and
| where I intend to spend money in the future.
|
| If I took all my expenses over my adult life of 15 years
| and calculated the price change between 15 years ago and
| when I purchased them, the total increase in prices
| eclipses the official nationwide statistics.
|
| So I assume healthcare costs will continue at above
| official inflation (especially as the proportion of young
| to old people decreases, which means less supply of labor
| in the face of increasing demand). And similar movements
| in the land and other labor I would be interested in.
|
| Also, social security retirement age was 65, and it was
| updated to 67 for those born in 1960 or later. It would
| be prudent to expect more increases in future years. I
| can easily see 70 being the new age at which you get
| "full" social security benefits.
|
| > but is not a reflection on how retirement is intended
| to work in the US.
|
| It does not matter what the intentions are. At the end of
| the day, it is productivity from the younger groups that
| allows for the benefits to be realized by older groups.
| As the younger group gets fewer and fewer, and the older
| group gets bigger and bigger, the supply of productivity
| from the younger groups decreases and the demand for it
| increases.
|
| The only way that works out is if fewer people actually
| get to realize those benefits, which means you want to be
| able to pay for it (with cash and/or political power).
| 1123581321 wrote:
| In the scenario that spawned this thread, much of the
| healthcare inflation costs are borne by a state's public
| health option. In some states, all or a portion of
| housing is as well.
|
| Again, I totally understand the skepticism about the
| long-term viability of social security. I also foresee
| retirement age adjustments up (they make some sense since
| people are living and working longer) and I also think
| that the income limitation on Social Security and
| Medicare tax will be increased in our lifetimes without
| offering proportional additional benefits to those paying
| to deal with the insufficient size in the working
| populations.
|
| However, the original misconception that started this
| thread was that a million in cash is required to retire
| in the US, and it's simply not, and it's not the
| intention of US policy to make that situation come about.
| It may inadvertently happen due to economic stress, but
| the same can be said about any western country's
| expensive public welfare programs.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I would venture most people in the US simply do not (or forgo)
| adequately saving or investing for the future, especially for
| their years after age 50.
|
| There are quite a bit of subsidies available though if you're
| in the bottom ~5 income deciles:
|
| https://www.healthcare.gov/glossary/subsidized-coverage/
|
| I think you get screwed roughly in the 6th to 8th income decile
| range, where you are not rich enough to be able to weather a
| calamity, but you are also earning too much to get assistance.
| A lot of people fall back down to the bottom deciles trying to
| move up to the top deciles if/when something goes wrong, but
| life is pretty nice for those that do make it.
| bingidingi wrote:
| the monthly premium isn't even the worst part, deductibles keep
| getting higher and it's not uncommon to be surprised with a
| bill for services that weren't covered by your plan (and it's
| very difficult to ensure you're 100% covered before receiving
| services, and nearly impossible in an emergency)
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| This should help on the out of network emergency billing
| front:
|
| https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/07/01/hhs-announces-
| rule...
| bingidingi wrote:
| it is promising, but note that it doesn't apply to
| ambulances - so we'll still be ubering to the er
| throwaway984393 wrote:
| Where is the magical insurance per month graphic? It looks like
| it's been replaced by an alcohol map of Kentucky?
| _puk wrote:
| I got caught by that one.
|
| Looks like the two graphics are in the wrong order. The
| "magical insurance" graphic is the one prior to the alcohol
| map.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| Doesn't improve my first impression of the writing.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| As an European, _so much_ of what has been described here is
| mind-boggling at best. WTF why does America have different sales
| taxes between _counties_? Why are "dry counties" even a thing?
| And why do healthcare costs differ so wildly?
|
| As a comparison, here in Germany it's one federal level of sales
| tax (19% and 7% for food and a couple other exempted items), one
| federal level of healthcare costs (7.3% of gross wage, plus .5-2%
| of surcharge depending on insurance company), and legal
| drinking/smoking age is federal 16 (beer/wine)/18 (tobacco, other
| alcohols), and you can buy alcohol and tobacco products
| everywhere.
| blamestross wrote:
| One thing Europeans often don't consider is that the population
| and size of a European country is about on par with a bigger US
| state and that US states have a lot of legal independence. So
| the variation is a bit less crazy than it sounds.
| reallydontask wrote:
| Not sure this is a good explanation as, for instance, the
| concept of a dry county/municipality is alien to most
| europeans.
|
| Similar with healthcare where it's by and large provided by
| the state.
|
| Obviously speaking from my experience which is limited to the
| bigger countries in europe
| nszceta wrote:
| Many original settlers including the pilgrims were
| religious extremists that the Europeans were all too happy
| to get rid of.
|
| https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01.html
| EricE wrote:
| I've lived in dozens of locations across the country and
| never lived in a dry county, and only occasionally
| encountered it in my travels. The amount of the population
| they affect is minuscule, despite the impressive looking
| charts - many of those counties are pretty low population.
| And as others pointed out pretty easy to work around. Even
| crazier than dry counties was South Carolina's mini-bottle
| laws. If you want something truly mind blowing do a quick
| search on that madness.
|
| As for our healthcare - I'll keep our system, warts and
| all. Not saying it can't be improved but at least I know
| when I need care I will be able to get it in my (literal!)
| lifetime. And if I'm sufficiently motivated I can get the
| best care available. I'll take that over any least common
| denominator one-size-fits-all model any day. Maybe your
| politicians are just better at running government programs
| - ours aren't. They are stupid bad at it. All I have to do
| is look at how well the free government provided health
| care is for our military veterans and know I don't want
| _our_ government anywhere near my healthcare, thank you
| very much.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| >And why do healthcare costs differ so wildly?
|
| Healthcare costs vary because labor, land, utility, legal, and
| other costs vary by location (especially legal as that is
| subject to many states' laws and judicial systems).
|
| Health insurance premiums vary because the risk pools for the
| insurance that individuals can buy via healthcare.gov are
| separated for each state. There is the federal law, ACA, but on
| certain states have more rules that distribute the healthcare
| costs even more to young/healthy people. See this page for some
| examples:
|
| https://www.valuepenguin.com/how-age-affects-health-insuranc...
|
| And in general, the administration and regulation of insurance
| pricing is on a state level too, so there might simply be
| variance due to that.
| xyzzyz wrote:
| The original political system of the US, before it was
| significantly changed in early-to-mid 20th century, was pretty
| similar to the current political system of Europe, where the
| role of US Federal Government was similar to current role of
| European Union, and the individual US states were like
| individual European states. In this view, US setup shouldn't
| surprise you, it's what you yourself experience.
| fennecfoxen wrote:
| America doesn't just have sales tax differences between
| counties! It can have sales tax differences between different
| parts of the same city, if they decide to set it up that way -
| usually as part of a Community Improvement District, or a
| Transit Development District, or what have you. The idea is
| that they built some infrastructure for retailers to take
| advantage of, and the retailers should add an extra 1% or so to
| pay for it.
|
| This is one reason why applying sales tax to online purchases
| is such a pain, and helps favor the incumbents like Amazon.
| throwaway984393 wrote:
| We had this little thing called a "civil war". Turns out a lot
| of our country doesn't like the idea of a federal government,
| and wants to do things its own way whenever it can. Trying to
| fix that in today's political climate would probably start
| another one.
|
| I think that's why we've been the big superpower for so long.
| We're fucking nuts. We'll invade your country for no reason and
| then try to make you pay for it.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| Lots of countries have had civil wars. Most of them, one side
| won and the other side lost.
|
| In the US, one side lost, and was then venerated as heroes,
| which is particularly odd.
| rsynnott wrote:
| I'm not sure it's _that_ odd, really. Like, who won the
| English civil war? _Really_ won it, long-term?
|
| You could argue that one both ways very easily; on the one
| hand, there's still a monarch, and there are no puritans.
| On the other, the monarch has no power (though you could
| convincingly argue that that was part of a process that was
| ongoing anyway, and the civil war didn't necessarily change
| the pace that much).
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| It's difficult to say either side is venerated as heroes.
|
| It's the combination which is very odd. Plenty of
| countries have civil strife and have one side viewed as
| heroes. In the US both Robert E Lee and Abraham Lincoln
| are venerated.
| big_youth wrote:
| Yeah... The US will invade countries for no reason but the
| trillions spent are added to the backs of our own citizens.
|
| Iraq and Afghanistan aren't paying us the trillions we've
| wasted these past decades.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > 19% and 7% for food and a couple other exempted items
|
| You're understating the complexity a bit here, I think. For
| instance, what's VAT on a loaf of bread, vs a bagel, vs a
| croissant? (I don't actually know for Germany, but in Ireland a
| loaf of bread is zero-rated, as is a bagel, but a croissant is
| reduced-rate, but for a period of around a year a few years
| back a bagel was also reduced-rate...)
|
| The US gets its tax complexity from regionalism, and Europe
| gets it from baroque VAT rules. It's debatable which is worse
| :)
| spdionis wrote:
| You're completely missing the point. The code style doesn't
| matter as long as it's consistent across the codebase.
| disgruntledphd2 wrote:
| Sure, but the big difference between Ireland vs the US is
| that in Ireland, the VAT is in the price you see on the
| object, whereas in the US things just cost extra when you go
| to pay for them.
|
| I agree that VAT rules are a bit nuts, but most of the
| insanity is shielded from most consumers.
| EricE wrote:
| I rather like having items and taxes separately. God knows
| how crazy our politicians would get with taxes if they were
| buried and not readily apparent!
| rsynnott wrote:
| Receipts in Europe will typically show VAT; it's just
| that the price of the item on the shelf or website or
| whatever must be inclusive of VAT (assuming that the
| target market is consumers; b2b sellers are allowed show
| ex-VAT figures provided they also show inc-VAT figures).
| rsynnott wrote:
| Oh, yeah, from a consumer perspective VAT is a far better
| experience, but that's largely disconnected from the nature
| of the tax, and more around consumer law. VAT is simple for
| consumers because the EU forces sellers to present inc-VAT
| prices. US sales tax is messy for consumers because the US
| doesn't. It's totally possible to imagine a VAT-type regime
| with US-style consumer rules, where you'd have to figure
| out if your bread was actually bread before putting it in
| the shopping basket.
| disgruntledphd2 wrote:
| > It's totally possible to imagine a VAT-type regime with
| US-style consumer rules, where you'd have to figure out
| if your bread was actually bread before putting it in the
| shopping basket.
|
| That would be _hilarious_ , especially if you're shopping
| with friends.
|
| It would be ludicrous though to actually implement,
| rather like the US's sales-tax system.
| antupis wrote:
| Dry counties were thing here Finland early 00s even now
| counties can forbid selling beverages that contain alcohol.
| eonwe wrote:
| With dry counties you mean counties that 25+ years ago
| allowed retail of alcohol only in Alko, the state monopoly
| store?
|
| I don't think counties can fully forbid sales of alcohol.
| jjgreen wrote:
| Also in Wales, but only to the extent of "pubs closed on a
| Sunday".
| paavohtl wrote:
| I wonder what you're referring to because Finland doesn't
| really have counties.
| sam345 wrote:
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratories_of_democracy
|
| https://www.pbs.org/tpt/constitution-usa-peter-sagal/federal...
|
| Due to its history and immigration, the US is much larger in
| population and size and more geologically, philosophically, and
| demographically more diverse than most countries. One size does
| not fit all if one is seeking a stable long lasting democracy.
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > As an European, so much of what has been described here is
| mind-boggling at best. WTF why does America have different
| sales taxes between counties? Why are "dry counties" even a
| thing? And why do healthcare costs differ so wildly?
|
| The United States is a big place. We have a similar landmass to
| all of Europe. The GDP of the state of California is almost as
| big as the GDP of Germany.
|
| It makes more sense when you think of the United States as,
| literally, a collection of states that have significant leeway
| in how they operate their affairs. Even individual counties can
| vary widely in their culture and governance practices.
|
| Dry counties are rare and usually associated with a highly
| religious population that chooses to live somewhere without
| alcohol sales. Generally these locations are not far from
| counties that allow liquor sales so purchasing alcohol is a
| matter of driving a short distance. However, most of the people
| who live there deliberately choose the location because they
| have no interest in alcohol so it's not really an issue for
| them.
| twic wrote:
| Ah, but America has freedom, so there are a lot more laws
| regulating what people can do.
| rm445 wrote:
| Jokes aside, the USA seems to have an enormous amount of
| local democracy with significant powers.
|
| The side most obvious to outsiders is where it seems to work
| badly - the bad sheriff who keeps being re-elected, quirks
| like dry counties. But it's admirable in a way, that people
| have some power to determine the local rules, together with
| the freedom to move away if they don't like it. If local
| democracy were extended further, there would be more
| variation, and more weirdness, but perhaps it would be a good
| thing overall.
| state_less wrote:
| Remote work via the internet will likely amplify the
| selection pressure too. Without being tied to a particular
| location due to your job, you can now shop around for an
| optimal location for your needs. If a bad state law is
| enacted, you might see people flock to another state.
|
| It'd be nice to see some CoL data on the international
| level too.
| AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
| Remote work is realistic for a tiny fraction of the
| population, and other pressures reduce the number of
| available remote work jobs even further (management
| culture, people who have no social life without the
| office, etc.). Remote work will change absolutely
| nothing.
| state_less wrote:
| > Remote work is realistic for a tiny fraction of the
| population
|
| I'm skeptical on this point. I think that we're already
| around 10-20% remote work and might get to 25% remote
| work in the coming years [1]. I don't think this is a
| tiny fraction. I'm expecting technology to further reduce
| the dependence on physical presence over time.
|
| I think remote work has had a significant change (e.g.
| less commute time, less pollution, more family time) and
| could cause changes in politics too. Imagine flipping a
| couple senate seats in a low population density area to
| further a remote work friendly lawmaking (i.e. land use
| rules, healthcare, etc...).
|
| [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/15/one-in-four-
| americans-will-b...
| EricE wrote:
| I don't think most people realized that not only is
| remote work feasible but for many professions -
| especially those in "knowledge work" - it's a huge boon.
|
| Peoples eyes have been opened and the genie is out of the
| bottle. I fully expect remote work to transform America
| to the extent that the post WWII suburbanization will
| look like a statistical anomaly by comparison.
| BoxOfRain wrote:
| I often find myself really liking the idea of local
| democracy and wishing for more of it where I live, but then
| I remember the kind of insane moral puritans with nothing
| better to do that get attacted to local politics like flies
| to rubbish tips! My country has a very authoritarian
| instinct among many in society to ban anything that doesn't
| neatly fit into their beige conventionality, and as bad as
| our heavily centralised government can be at least it keeps
| a muzzle on those sorts of people to an extent.
| richardwhiuk wrote:
| I think part of the problem is media coverage of the
| democracy - at some point, coherent, competent analysis
| and coverage becomes impractical.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Local democracy sounds nice in the abstract, right up
| until you look at it: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-
| news/2021/feb/05/handforth-in...
|
| (Note that a 'parish council' here is for a civil parish,
| that is the smallest type of administrative unit in the
| UK; it's not a church parish)
|
| At that point, you will probably be relieved that those
| idiots aren't allowed do anything important.
|
| I suppose in principle if local authorities were more
| important, you might get more competent people running
| for election onto them, but given the average quality of
| _national_ backbenchers, this seems optimistic.
| BoxOfRain wrote:
| I think we have to fundamentally change how the party
| system works if we're going to get people in politics for
| the right reasons in general, but especially in local
| politics. There's no reason that the people collecting
| bins, filling potholes, and providing essential services
| along those lines need to be associated with the moral
| abattoirs that are the national political parties for
| example, at least in my experience these local
| politicians are voted on based on an area's national
| political inclinations rather than any individual merit
| which lets all sorts of lunatics in. The first thing we
| need to do is break this link and make local government
| completely non-partisan.
|
| I wish there was an empirical way of screening out moral
| puritan types with the aim of directly eliminating their
| influence, but I'm not sure that can be done without
| endangering democracy itself. A more difficult but much
| more ethical approach I think is to try and create new
| social norms that make aggressive conformity something to
| be ashamed rather than proud of, puritanism in any
| direction should be made into a sign of weakness rather
| than strength. We need a society that instinctively
| defends "witches" when the witch-hunters are in town.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > The first thing we need to do is break this link and
| make local government completely non-partisan.
|
| That's impossible; political parties naturally emerge in
| democracies. Very few countries have the official
| recognition of parties that the US does (party
| registration, official primaries etc) but all democracies
| have political parties.
| BoxOfRain wrote:
| Even if we kept national politics partisan which I'm
| personally against for a number of reasons, the petty
| squabbles and power plays of Westminster are utterly
| irrelevant to the functions of local government and
| should play no part in its selection.
|
| Non-partisan democracies do exist, some of them are even
| directly associated with the UK such as the Falkland
| Islands and the Isle of Man which are roughly the size of
| a British parish and a council respectively.
| EricE wrote:
| It's easier to get in the face of local politicians vs.
| ones hundreds or thousands of miles away.
|
| Indeed I would argue the more we defer to national politics
| the worse (dramatically worse!) things get. Senators were
| set up to be elected by the state legislatures on purpose
| to encourage people to pay attention to their state
| legislatures. The House of Representatives were selected by
| popular vote.
|
| Separation of duties/check and balances. The 17th amendment
| "fixed" that - and I'd say every since it's been downhill
| from there. Pure democracy's CAN NOT work - it's why we are
| (for now) a representative republic. There is no perfect
| system as long as humans are involved, but we were blessed
| with a pretty good one. I wish people would stop trying to
| tear it down - we know from history the alternatives are
| pretty gawd awful.
| handrous wrote:
| A _very_ well-travelled photoblogger I used to read once
| remarked that no country in the world loves posting
| paragraphs of fine-print regulations and signs telling you
| what you can 't do, all over every wall, sidewalk, curb, and
| business entrance like the US does--IIRC only a couple others
| (I wanna say Australia?) even came close. Most have,
| comparatively, practically none, democracies and
| authoritarians states alike. After having that pointed out, I
| can't un-see it. We really do love it.
| blunte wrote:
| The author is a person I would never argue with.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| Never argue, or never bother arguing with?
| hoppyhoppy2 wrote:
| >I might have gone a little bit overboard
|
| When a blog post weighs over 4MB, yeah, I'd call that going a
| little bit overboard :)
| johnchristopher wrote:
| Really nice reading ! Not ashamed to admit I didn't understand
| everything and didn't reach the end (to my defense: not living in
| the US, not a us citizen).
|
| But considering taxes can change from year to year, all this work
| and research has to be redone every few years, right ?
| Johnny555 wrote:
| The missing dimension is "climate", which is at the top of my
| list when looking for places to retire - I like to spend time
| outside.
|
| I live in the Pacific Northwest and while winters are a little
| too cold and rainy, summers are typically perfect (ignoring the
| recent Heat Dome, which I hope will not become a regular part of
| summer). I've thought about moving back to the Bay Area
| (fortunately, my job allows me to afford it), but between the
| droughts and wildfires, I'm not sure it's the same place that I
| left. Maybe I'll just rent an AirBNB there for a month in the
| winter.
| natmaka wrote:
| Such an optimization, if largely adopted, may create zoned
| clusters, "administrative/geographic areas were a given category
| of population is over-represented".
|
| This will boost any pertinent local commercial activity (and,
| reciprocally, dumb down anything not pertinent), the zone will
| become even more attractive to this population category, and so
| on...
|
| This population category will gain influence, and vote local laws
| in favor among its members, boosting the feedback loop.
| asoneth wrote:
| This theory is often called "the Big Sort".
|
| In abstract, allowing people to move to places where the
| government and work more closely matches their personal values
| and skillsets seems like a good way to increase everyone's
| satisfaction. In practice I'm not sure.
| nickhalfasleep wrote:
| Would be even nicer if it included long term climate and
| environmental risks. Those Georgia locations are going to bake.
| dragonwriter wrote:
| referring to 2016 presidential election data:
|
| > Having access to this information at a state level in the past
| was a simple public records request. Having this level of
| detailed information at a national level, with a tool affordable
| enough so that an individual entity separate from a corporation
| could visualize the results - historic.
|
| Only the GIS-style visualization part, which is probably the
| least important piece if you are cross tabulating with other
| county- and state-level data to find a county suitable to live
| in, e.g., for 2012:
|
| https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/nov/07/us-201...
|
| IIRC, most states have been posting county level results on the
| web since the late 1990s, so it's mostly been an evening of
| crossing public websites even before convenient national
| aggregates were published.
| MobileVet wrote:
| This is really fantastic... and also fairly sobering. Healthcare
| as the major cost center for an individual is partially
| understandable yet often discounted. Sad the variance is so high.
|
| I would love to see this for the top ~40 or so countries of the
| world. As indicated in the comments, I think it would be very
| different and offer an interesting look at cost / benefits of
| various governments as they relate to someone's livelihood.
| smeej wrote:
| I was confused why this matters so much in a discussion of
| where to _retire._
|
| The Social Security calculations clearly indicate that's the
| consideration, but Medicare kicks in at 65. What does the ACA
| matter at that point?
|
| I'd have understood if there was mention of Medicare gap
| coverage options instead, but ACA costs really don't make sense
| to me in this context.
| jupiter90000 wrote:
| She mentioned calculating that due to retiring before the age
| of 65 as an option. However comparing only 2nd cheapest
| silver plan seems a little lacking; more equivalent would
| probably entail comparing price of plans that are actually
| close to equivalent in terms of deductibles and out of pocket
| costs. When I've looked at ACA plans, there seems to be
| significant variance between states and just using the plan
| color and price doesn't necessarily indicate they are close
| to equivalent.
| chromatin wrote:
| The writing was really bad and difficult to follow.
|
| In the end I realized it was an ad for her startup (willowfinch)
| which apparently does the same thing -- screen for where-to-live.
| sonofaragorn wrote:
| How did this get to the front page of HN? It's very poor
| quality and almost every comment has a negative sentiment.
| burnished wrote:
| Because it is interesting! Not every blog with a good idea to
| explore is a well polished and well produced performance, you
| know?
| sonofaragorn wrote:
| Good point! I guess I just thought the bar was higher. I've
| seen people write on their bio that they got to the front
| page once lol
| EricE wrote:
| Yes, I found it extremely helpful, and so have several
| friends I've already shared it with. I find the comments
| about "quality" pretty ludicrous and more than a bit
| elitist.
| remram wrote:
| I think it's on purpose. The cryptic title doesn't help either.
| saimiam wrote:
| Yeah, I realize that but the HN submission rules say not to
| edit the title.
|
| Btw, I didn't write the piece - I just built the blogging
| platform on which this is hosted.
| sidlls wrote:
| This is a really poor, rambling presentation of some really poor
| quality data analysis.
| commandlinefan wrote:
| I re-read the first paragraph a few times and finally figured
| out "hubster" means "her husband" (I think...). There might be
| some value in here, but I couldn't get through the writing.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I did not think there was any value, especially as it turned
| out to be a poorly written ad (or may be just one that was
| not intended to appeal to me).
|
| Her partner's obsession with sales tax made no sense either,
| considering there are far bigger costs to consider for one's
| retirement budget.
| robotresearcher wrote:
| The article says
|
| > Who cares if there are income taxes? When it came to
| monthly expenses, the savings would be thousands less paid
| in health insurance.
| eplanit wrote:
| Yes. In the end, the piece is really an ad for her analytics
| business.
| thayne wrote:
| How did we get to a point where people make decisions about where
| they move based on how the neighbors voted in the last election?
| Revekius wrote:
| I highly recommend reading "The Big Sort" by Bill Bishop to
| give you a better idea of why we look at "politics".
|
| https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2569072-the-big-sort
|
| The idea is a lot less about politics, and more about being
| comfortable in the area you live in.
| psychometry wrote:
| When one of the two major candidates decided the US shouldn't
| be a democracy any more?
| [deleted]
| Aeolun wrote:
| Well... like. If I were living in the Netherlands I would not
| care one whit.
|
| Seeing those raving lunatics roving over the capitol grounds
| gives me pause though.
|
| I _know_ most people aren't like that, but it's hard to not be
| worried.
| commandlinefan wrote:
| > Seeing those raving lunatics roving over the capitol
| grounds
|
| I know, the Kavanaugh protesters were totally unreasonable.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| I think he either means the two left wing capitol bombings,
| or Jan 6th. Who can tell anymore!?
| asoneth wrote:
| I lived in multiple deep red communities in multiple red states
| while working as a military contractor. The warfighters I
| worked with were absolutely phenomenal but the broader cities
| and towns around were a poor culture fit for me. (To be clear,
| my neighbors were all very nice people, it was just the culture
| fit compared to purple/blue areas I've lived in.)
|
| I'd suggest that if someone is more than a couple of queer,
| atheist, racial minority, vegetarian, cyclist, artist, nerdy,
| career-oriented female, etc then they may find it even more
| challenging to fit in.
|
| It's worth looking carefully at any community before moving in,
| but it's worth looking especially carefully before moving to a
| deep red area in a red state.
|
| (Or vice-versa if you're a religious conservative -- you might
| find a dark blue community in a blue state a poor fit.)
| jupiter90000 wrote:
| It's not that hard to see why this matters now.
|
| On the one hand you have folks that want to ban rights of LGBTQ
| folks, end ability to get an abortion safely, for example.
|
| On the other there's those that want to remove powers of the
| police, allow homeless drug addicts to take over neighborhoods,
| and more authoritarian style lockdown policies in public
| health.
|
| There's people that really don't like some of that and will go
| where their lives feel less restricted.
| voakbasda wrote:
| Indeed. I want to relocate where there are none of either
| persuasion. Every side is utterly wackadoo, and I would just
| as soon get out of here once and for all.
|
| But there is no place to go. The global status quo has me
| trapped here as a prisoner. There will no escape, no relief,
| and no freedom. I am and shall always be a slave of some
| State; I can only pick my poison.
|
| These words will ring true, for some, in every corner of the
| world. But by all means, continue to ignore, marginalize, and
| exploit us. That surely will end well.
| liketochill wrote:
| People are mostly pretty chill in Canada
| EricE wrote:
| lol https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYbBKjh-zic
|
| Recent rulings in Canada over speech are pretty nuts too
| given their history. Worse than the batshit crazy stuff
| going on in Britain today :p
| [deleted]
| remram wrote:
| This is the only way to vote in the US. The election system
| does not tally individual ballots, only number of inhabitants
| in blue and red states/counties.
|
| Given that system, this is a very democratic and rational move.
| rsynnott wrote:
| ... I mean, I think we've always been there, or at least some
| of us have? I live in Ireland, which is generally less
| politically divided than the US, but I don't think I'd be up
| from moving from my current area (where 75% of people voted to
| allow same-sex marriage) to one of the rural areas that voted
| about 50%. I'd rather live in a place where only a quarter of
| the neighbors think I shouldn't have basic civil rights than
| one where half do. This doesn't seem so out there?
|
| That's the personal angle of course, but also I'd generally
| prefer to live somewhere where the neighbors aren't out to get
| other marginalised groups, either...
|
| US political party identification is a decent though not
| perfect proxy for how your neighbors are likely to feel about a
| whole range of issues, and _people_.
| SV_BubbleTime wrote:
| > US political party identification is a decent though not
| perfect proxy for how your neighbors are likely to feel about
| a whole range of issues, and _people_.
|
| Not nearly as much as you have been told it is. But that's a
| really nice way to generalize conservatives as racists. The
| truth is as a local who has lived in both areas, I've met
| just as many left wing racists as right, just in different
| ways.
| cloverich wrote:
| People includes people who are gay, trans, muslims, etc.
| But i think the broader "whole range of issuse" claim was
| more to the point, as someone who has spent most of their
| life amongst deep red friends, family, and locations, those
| issues come up quite a bit. And more pointedly, for example
| i am pretty interested (and fearful) of climate change but
| can't even talk about it with half my friends/ family
| because they don't think its real or may be offended by
| some of the points. It takes a toll on you.
| fundad wrote:
| I find that many pro-establishment people on the left are
| uncomfortable acknowledging institutional racism and harbor
| some anti-blackness.
|
| I find more diversity of thought among anti-establishment
| left because what's important to them/us is addressed by
| such a variety of movements rather than mainstream
| politics.
|
| In this sense establishment Democrats are a proxy for the
| anti-establishment left, many of whom can't even vote.
| [deleted]
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I get access to paid parental leave, an extra 8 weeks of
| parental leave, do not have to worry about women's healthcare
| (abortion choice), higher minimum wages and a minimum salary,
| no tipped wages, assisted suicide, legal marijuana, etc. I can
| also get alcohol in the next aisle over instead of having to go
| to a different store (not that I drink outside of an occasion,
| but the principal of it annoyed me).
|
| And even though a bunch do not affect me, my kids might benefit
| from them someday. Was a no brainer for me to look at how my
| neighbors would be voting when choosing where to live.
| fundad wrote:
| The strong correlation between voting and denying the Jan 6
| attack, Climate Change and COVID-19 is how.
| seventytwo wrote:
| Did you live under a rock the last four years?!
| [deleted]
| Simulacra wrote:
| When we were looking for our first house we got a flyer about a
| service that would help us choose the best location that fit with
| our "lifestyle and personal" preferences. Once of those was to
| look at which neighborhoods were liberal and which were
| conservative, and give us an idea of the kind of neighbors we
| would have. Quite useful, though we never used the service, as
| granular data continues to be collected and stored I wonder if
| we'll see people more and more choosing neighborhoods based on
| the quality of their neighbors.
| mikewarot wrote:
| There were many fascinating things here, but in the back of my
| mind, there was this
|
| "The best-laid schemes o' mice an' men Gang aft agley"
|
| I'd go for friends, family, and a place where you'd be happy.
| Taxes and other factors vary across time, why not be somewhere
| nice instead of always worrying the optimum spot won't be next
| year?
| engineer_22 wrote:
| Unfortunately the cool tool she is touting is not open to public
| testing?
| pferde wrote:
| "You need to enable JavaScript to run this app."
|
| Yeah, I'd say you might have gone a little bit overboard, for an
| "app" that just shows a text article.
| tommek4077 wrote:
| Good luck with a comment like this in this JavaScript
| "Hacker"-Community. +1
| outsidetheparty wrote:
| I was honestly intrigued by the startup this is an ad for -- this
| subject is very relevant to my interests -- but their website
| just has more marketing copy, a YouTube video demonstrating
| features that don't appear to exist anywhere, and a "sign up for
| our spam" form.
|
| Maybe wait to start your marketing efforts until you actually
| have something ready to market, eh?
| RosanaAnaDana wrote:
| >Maybe wait to start your marketing efforts until you actually
| have something ready to market, eh?
|
| I feel personally attacked by this sentiment. As a fellow wonk,
| there is a lot more to getting a program out to the world than
| just the cleverness of connecting the dots. You don't have
| anything without the cleverness, but the dot connecting takes
| time. I look forward to good things. I liked the blog and I
| think the product would be neat to couple with zillow
| fantasies.
| outsidetheparty wrote:
| I don't understand what you mean by "the cleverness of
| connecting the dots" or why you would feel personally
| attacked.
|
| My point was that I, a potential customer -- this really is
| directly relevant to my current life situation -- visited the
| site, found nothing there but an email harvester, so left
| without spending any money and with a poor impression of the
| company.
|
| Driving people to your site before there's anything there is
| wasted effort. Save it for when you're actually ready to do
| something with that traffic.
| EricE wrote:
| Hi! I really enjoyed your post. As to the site, it would be
| VERY helpful if there were at least a "Coming Soon" or
| something similar. I was trying different browsers,
| computers, etc. just to ensure there wasn't something
| technical on my side preventing me from potentially using the
| site.
|
| You typically get one chance to make a first impression.
| Indeed, along with the "Coming Soon" message you can offer to
| notify people when you do go operational - win win. I'd like
| that since the site looks like it could be very useful (and
| not just for myself!).
| rcthompson wrote:
| The exposition on how to interpret boxplots is odd, especially
| the part about the difference between the median and the mean
| being representative of the "variance". I want to give the
| benefit of the doubt and assume the author is simply using
| "variance" to refer to a different statistical concept (e.g.
| skew), but then later she writes "the variance between the
| Washington state average & median values is negligible - meaning
| there is little / no variation in the dataset" which is just
| wrong. The WA boxplot has the _largest_ variance of any state on
| the plot. And the distinction is not just academic, because that
| larger variance increases the potential savings for moving from
| their current WA home to a cheaper home in the same state.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-07-07 23:02 UTC)