Okay but it’s only an improvement for people can afford it. Other people die. That’s the entire argument behind calling Brian Thompson a murderer, by advocating for not distributing based on need you’re essentially what other commenters in this thread would call a murderer.
You can have mutual aid and charitable funding RIGHT NOW. Nothing is stopping us, it’s heavily advocated for.
Aaaaand you ignored the part of my argument where it’s still a marginal improvement for that population (who already can’t afford it even with insurance). The other commenter is right, you’re cherrypicking and arguing in bad faith. I’ve no patience for sealions. Bye.
Aaaaaand I don’t think it would be an improvement at all because I don’t think people would be sharing their wealth without incentive to have their own issues covered. As I mentioned before, you can right at this very moment do charity or community action to cover the care of people who need it, such as donating to St. Jude’s Childrens Hospital. People aren’t, though. They don’t want to cover somebody else’s problem.
I’ve been fighting sealions like you all day, must be a skill issue.
Up/downvotes don’t mesh with your “skill issue” observation.
You ignored their whole point that abolishing the health insurance industry would bring costs down for everyone, but act like they’re the one with a skill issue? Get bent with your bad faith, cherry-picked arguments. lol
