511
submitted 11 months ago by ZeroCool@feddit.ch to c/news@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Veedem@lemmy.world 268 points 11 months ago

Anyone else remember, in the lead up to the ObamaCare vote, when the GOP used the idea of government officials (death panels) deciding who should get treatment and who should die as a fear mongering tactic?

My my my how the turns have tabled.

[-] Kalkaline@leminal.space 85 points 11 months ago

It's ok when multi billion dollar insurance companies do it when they decide which med they're going to pay for.

[-] Unaware7013@kbin.social 31 points 11 months ago

Yeah, just as long as the government keeps its damned hands off my medicare!

[-] thefartographer@lemm.ee 15 points 11 months ago

My insurance company is my friend! They make the pills that make the sad go away cost less.

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 22 points 11 months ago

Insurance actually generally increases prices. Then they "negotiate it down" to regular prices.

[-] Alteon@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

They are not your friend. They are the reason your pill costs so much. Pharmacist can actually charge less for them if you say you want to pay in cash - you often pay MORE to use insurance on a lot of prescribed medication. They legally can not tell you that.

Read up, it doesn't hurt to talk to pharmacist https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/why-a-patient-paid-a-285-copay-for-a-40-drug

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Drusas@kbin.social 31 points 11 months ago

I had to go to the ER recently because my insurance decided to stop paying for the higher quality iron infusion formulation and switched to only being willing to pay for the cheapest options. Turns out the cheap, less popular options are more likely to have bad reactions.

Wish I could sue them, or at least have whoever made that decision suffer the pain that I did.

I can at least be somewhat comforted by the fact that that emergency visit cost them a lot more than the usual formulation would have. Try to save money on my health care? Fuck you, too.

[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 34 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

There have ALWAYS been death panels. There are death panels RIGHT NOW.

They're occupied by insurance corporations balancing the profit from your premiums and the cost of your treatment. Is it cheaper to let someone die? Can we save the life so they will continue to pay premiums? Can we deny treatment without a media circus that makes us look bad? If there IS a media circus, will they die soon enough that everybody forgets?

I would rather take corporate profit out of the equation.

[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 29 points 11 months ago

Every accusation is a confession. Every single one.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 24 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Anytime someone says death panels I have a compulsive need to post this:

Frame Canada: Wendell Potter spent decades scaring Americans. About Canada. He worked for the health insurance industry, and he knew that if Americans understood Canadian-style health care, they might.... like it. So he helped deploy an industry playbook for protecting the health insurance agency. https://www.npr.org/2020/10/19/925354134/frame-canada

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] prole@sh.itjust.works 111 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Fucking insanity. Nobody but this woman and her fucking doctor should even know about this shit. Unbelievable.

[-] Plavatos@sh.itjust.works 35 points 11 months ago

I said it in another post but these are the actual Death Panels Sarah Palin 'fabricated' (since hers was a huge lie). The government is actually standing between a person who needs care and their doctor.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 34 points 11 months ago

That was what Roe was actually about, the right to medical privacy and patient doctor sovereignty

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Nobody@lemmy.world 109 points 11 months ago

I asked my doctor, you know, best case, how much time she thinks we would have with her. And she said, 'Could be an hour. Could be a week,' but that we needed to prepare ourselves to be placing this baby onto hospice. There's no treatment. So that was very, very hard," Cox said.

Why bring a life into the world just to suffer and die?

These laws are beyond cruel. And the authorities are actively fighting to deny justice.

[-] cosmicrookie@lemmy.world 25 points 11 months ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] TenderfootGungi@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

I often use pets as an example. We have no problem ending the life of an animal to prevent suffering. But we are unwilling to do the same with fellow humans.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] not_that_guy05@lemmy.world 93 points 11 months ago

"I'm a Texan. I love Texas. I'm raising my children here. I was raised here. I've built my academic career, my professional career here. You know, I plan to stay. And so I want to be able to get access to the medical care that I need, and my daughter to have it as well," Cox said.

Yeah I don't think you are learning anything out of this. Stay in a state that does not care about you. Like a physical abusive relationship.

[-] Jonny@kbin.social 49 points 11 months ago

I don't really agree with the abusive relationship analogy. Things only change if there are people there who want it to change. While I understand and sympathise with the desire to leave, I have the utmost respect for those who choose to stay and try to make/ be the change needed.

[-] xkforce@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago

A lot of people have stayed in abusive relationships for that reason: "They can change! I can change them." Meanwhile the state is rapidly moving backwards. This is like being dragged behind the abuser's truck and not wanting to cut the rope.

[-] Drusas@kbin.social 18 points 11 months ago

A lot of people stay in abusive relationships because they don't have a realistic opportunity to leave. A lot of people in abusive states like Texas stay because they don't have a realistic opportunity to leave.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] alvvayson@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

You are totally right.

These people would have shit on Rosa Parks, too.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Riccosuave@lemmy.world 39 points 11 months ago

This was my initial reaction as well, but now I'm not so sure. Somebody has to be the public example, and fight this broken system. This has gotten a large amount of national media exposure, and that is ultimately what mobilizes voters. She also seems willing to suffer for her convictions, which is more than most people can say.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] derf82@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

While I get the sentiment, remember this is part of Republican’s grand plan. If they can make things so bad that liberals largely all concentrate in the likes of CA, NY, MA, IL, OR, WA, CT, RI, and VT, they can guarantee themselves permanent control of the Senate and a massive leg up on the presidency. They get to effectively gerrymander America.

They have already done this in the likes of Ohio and Florida. These former swing states are now solidly Red.

Republicans are worried about Texas, though. Republicans cannot take the White House without Texas. But an influx of people and changing demographics are pushing Texas toward purple territory. So they are doing everything to make the state hostile to liberals.

She is also trying to rally Texans to her side, and if she started saying “this state sucks” she would win less sympathy.

[-] hglman@lemmy.ml 16 points 11 months ago

Most of the people who are being harmed cannot leave. They are too poor to do so.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 83 points 11 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] derf82@lemmy.world 74 points 11 months ago

This was such a gimme for the “pro life” side. Even the moron that is the Ohio AG admitted that a 10 year old rape victim should be able to get an abortion (he just pretended she didn’t exist and refused to admit the vague language of the law wasn’t clear on that.) All he would have had to do is say “of course someone with an unviable pregnancy that carrying to term would jeopardize the mother’s health can get an abortion, we’re not monsters!” That would do more to stem the backlash from Dobbs than anything.

But, no. Paxton instead makes the case for us. All but the most extreme anti-abortion can see this is cruel. What a raging asshole.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 17 points 11 months ago

Really just gives the game to the side that's for abortion with no restrictions, now they can just point to this and rub it in that any restrictions are inevitably going to be used as grounds for total restriction.

[-] Mossheart@lemmy.ca 53 points 11 months ago

I just started watching the Handmaid's Take for the first time tonight. JFC, it's supposed to be fiction, not a blueprint.

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 27 points 11 months ago

More of a warning, but few people were paying attention.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] dipshit@lemmy.world 44 points 11 months ago

GOP won’t stop until every woman you know is dead.

[-] toomanypancakes@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

Now, now, let's be reasonable. They want to get the ones you don't know, too.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 40 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

"Temporarily". Because their discussions are more important than any human being's immediate health emergency.

At this point, it is perfectly reasonable to view conservatives as subhuman. They are incapable of displaying even a tiny hint of humanity. Until there is evidence that they see others as humans, they should be offered no such respect in turn. They are simply a plague of oppression and death.

load more comments (11 replies)
[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 32 points 11 months ago

I sometimes wish they were correct about their God's existence so that I knew there was a hell they'd burn in.

[-] JimmyBigSausage@lemm.ee 31 points 11 months ago
[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

I agree but the dems had the numbers to pass abortion into law half a dozen times since the roe v wade decision but have never done it.

What are the odds they will do it this time?

Are they even campaigning that they will?

[-] LillyPip@lemmy.ca 17 points 11 months ago

The odds are pretty high, actually.

Back then, most people didn’t consider it an urgent issue because most people considered it settled law and didn’t really believe it would be overturned. Most people didn’t really consider that the Supreme Court would be compromised to the degree it has.

That perception has changed dramatically, and it’s proven to be a winning issue for Dems. As the next voting cycle ramps up, it will likely be a big campaign point. In order to have any chance at all, though, Dems must gain a solid majority in Congress.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Rusticus@lemmy.world 30 points 11 months ago

Who the fuck supports the Republican approach to this case? Really what. The. Fuck.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago

A victory for Christianity. Every time a woman loses control over her own body or dies from an ectopic pregnancy the Christian blood god is appeased.

[-] tastysnacks@programming.dev 13 points 11 months ago

Her husband could say she cheated and point directly to the place in the bible where it says abortion is allowed.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SCB@lemmy.world 22 points 11 months ago

Can I just buy this woman a plane ticket to Ohio already?

[-] roofuskit@lemmy.world 14 points 11 months ago

Illinois instead. We actually have programs here to support people from out of state like this woman. In Ohio the legislature is trying to undo the will of the people.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Pons_Aelius@kbin.social 19 points 11 months ago

Another stunning example of personal freedom from The Greatest Country on Earth (Trade mark. Not to be used in comparison to any other nation)

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] NatakuNox@lemmy.world 17 points 11 months ago

Because it's about controlling women. If a women has a miscarriage or the baby is nonviable in any way the woman must have done something to cause it. So she must be punished, if not legally, than medically. Just look at what's happening to women that have miscarriages in Ohio. (a state that just enshrined the right to an abortion by popular vote but it's still controlled by the GOP.) If you live in a read state and are pregnant, leave the state asap. Your life and your babies life is in danger even if you have a pregnancy with no complications.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Dec 2023
511 points (100.0% liked)

News

23268 readers
2309 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS