|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
So not only has he taken credit for ending the payments he is now saying he can fix it thus Trumpcare being born as a result.
|
On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend
That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment?
|
On October 13 2017 21:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. A lot of the SJWs will accept someone white and male so long as they cower, apologize, and identify victim groups and their oppressions. Translation: They listen to other people and do not automatically dismiss their complaints as being hysterical. Listening is seen as cowering and apologizing.
Well, for the people with the starting position "I support white supremacy and you're just going to have to love it or leave it" it's a sensible interpretation.
People that are still waiting to be convinced of the systemic injustice that's persisted the entirety of this country should be sorry and scared.
+ Show Spoiler +“Negroes
Sweet and docile,
Meek, humble, and kind:
Beware the day
They change their minds!
Wind
In the cotton fields,
Gentle breeze:
Beware the hour
It uproots trees!”
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 13 2017 21:40 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:On October 13 2017 09:37 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. A conviction isn't a requirement for pardon. He can pardon anyone for anything they did or did not do at any time after they did or did not do. Presidents can pardon someone for things they may or may not have done, thus preempting any criminal proceedings. Some people think pardoning allies for campaign malfeasance is the line he can't cross without congressional republicans starting to consider impeachment, but I think it's quite likely that if Kushner got charged, Trump would immediately pardon with the argument that the charges are bullshit and he wants his team to go back to work instead of fighting bullshit criminal charges. And the rest of the world would think "that's fucked up" but not do anything about it. Just like all the other fucked up shit he's said and done. Danglars would probably still consider him a "necessary evil."
Which is why I just argued that a conviction/pardon of his son-in-law would be a big thing against someone that didn't think it would be one. You should really substitute my real arguments for your contortions of them and assumptions if you want to rise above the trolls.
|
This whole thing is kind of like burning your homes or the ships you arrived in to make sure your soldiers know that they have to either win or die.
He can't figure out a way to fix healthcare because his party simply does not have any plan whatsoever, and instead of fixing that first, Trump tries to break the system in place to force them to come up with something, or at least agree upon it.
And the worst thing is, when the healthcare system fails now, Trump supporters will still manage to blame Obama for it. Instead of Trump, who actively broke it to make an argument.
This man is utterly disgusting. Trumps ego is the one thing that counts for him. Trumps ego is more important than millions of people. Republicans need to get their shit together and figure out a way to get rid of him as fast as possible.
I think at this point it is completely clear that there is nothing that Trump won't do as long as it makes him feel like a big strong man making big strong decisions. If his ego gets threatened, he will attack and bully whatever makes him feel strong to prove to himself that he still has power.
And his ego will get threatened a lot, because he is simply really bad at being a president, but can't accept anything less than being the best president ever.
|
On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment?
It was pretty much an answer to your whole post. Identity politics aren't good or bad in a vacuum. Your attempt to encourage leftist views that it is bad strategically cannot be separated from your initial misguided thought that they are bad in a vacuum.
|
Time for rural Trump voters to feel the effects of their vote.
|
On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment?
No. Just wondering about the context.
I tend to agree with your sentiment that the current reporting about kushner is more about headlines than actual content. I'd like more in depth articles on the matter. Though his demeanor surely leaves room for improvement. Like a whole lot of room.
|
On October 13 2017 22:02 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment? It was pretty much an answer to your whole post. Identity politics aren't good or bad in a vacuum. Your attempt to encourage leftist views that it is bad strategically cannot be separated from your initial misguided thought that they are bad in a vacuum.
I said it in light of the forumgoers here and informatively to morty. I can't really make sense of your comment. I'm not making some point-by-point defense that SJW-ism and identity politics and race-card politics are bad, I'm just observing the stigma in the past and (unquoted portion) elaborating on its proponents and makeup.
On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said.
It was mainly to acknowledge and reiterate. I also wondered why Gahlo would think it was insignificant in the first place.
|
On October 13 2017 22:14 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:02 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment? It was pretty much an answer to your whole post. Identity politics aren't good or bad in a vacuum. Your attempt to encourage leftist views that it is bad strategically cannot be separated from your initial misguided thought that they are bad in a vacuum. I said it in light of the forumgoers here and informatively to morty. I can't really make sense of your comment. I'm not making some point-by-point defense that SJW-ism and identity politics and race-card politics are bad, I'm just observing the stigma in the past and (unquoted portion) elaborating on its proponents and makeup. Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. It was mainly to acknowledge and reiterate. I also wondered why Gahlo would think it was insignificant in the first place.
Would you disagree with the notion that identity politics are inherently bad? You should, this notion is demonstrably false, but I can't make sense of your worldview if you do disagree with it, including but not limited to your strategical tips for the left.
|
Danglars, from what I now understand of the use of the word "SJW", aren't you in effect perpetuating that very same identity politics and race-card politics that you decry?
|
On October 13 2017 22:01 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 21:40 ChristianS wrote:On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. A conviction isn't a requirement for pardon. He can pardon anyone for anything they did or did not do at any time after they did or did not do. Presidents can pardon someone for things they may or may not have done, thus preempting any criminal proceedings. Some people think pardoning allies for campaign malfeasance is the line he can't cross without congressional republicans starting to consider impeachment, but I think it's quite likely that if Kushner got charged, Trump would immediately pardon with the argument that the charges are bullshit and he wants his team to go back to work instead of fighting bullshit criminal charges. And the rest of the world would think "that's fucked up" but not do anything about it. Just like all the other fucked up shit he's said and done. Danglars would probably still consider him a "necessary evil." Which is why I just argued that a conviction/pardon of his son-in-law would be a big thing against someone that didn't think it would be one. You should really substitute my real arguments for your contortions of them and assumptions if you want to rise above the trolls.
I never said you wouldn't think it was a big deal, just that it probably wouldn't move the dial for you on whether Trump was a "necessary evil." Is thst not true? That's a pleasant surprise.
I asked once what Trump would have to do for you to consider him a mistake, and you refused to answer. That doesn't give me much choice besides guessing what your answer might be. There's no "real argument" to substitute.
|
On October 13 2017 22:06 farvacola wrote:
Time for rural Trump voters to feel the effects of their vote.
They'll blame everyone but Trump.
|
On October 13 2017 22:46 Furikawari wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:06 farvacola wrote:
Time for rural Trump voters to feel the effects of their vote. They'll blame everyone but Trump.
Nah, nothing Trump has done thus far will viscerally hurt these voters the way ending the insurance subsidies will and many Republican state politicians are already feeling the heat. We'll have to agree to disagree until this shitshow shakes out more  A lot of the Trump voters I grew up with are besides themselves this morning.
|
On October 13 2017 22:21 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 22:02 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment? It was pretty much an answer to your whole post. Identity politics aren't good or bad in a vacuum. Your attempt to encourage leftist views that it is bad strategically cannot be separated from your initial misguided thought that they are bad in a vacuum. I said it in light of the forumgoers here and informatively to morty. I can't really make sense of your comment. I'm not making some point-by-point defense that SJW-ism and identity politics and race-card politics are bad, I'm just observing the stigma in the past and (unquoted portion) elaborating on its proponents and makeup. On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. It was mainly to acknowledge and reiterate. I also wondered why Gahlo would think it was insignificant in the first place. Would you disagree with the notion that identity politics are inherently bad? You should, this notion is demonstrably false, but I can't make sense of your worldview if you do disagree with it, including but not limited to your strategical tips for the left.
I think its current practice is at levels that are absolutely bad. I know past apartheid and slavery made it necessary and it can be an important minor force if political debate swings back.
On October 13 2017 22:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Danglars, from what I now understand of the use of the word "SJW", aren't you in effect perpetuating that very same identity politics and race-card politics that you decry?
I never associated that political and social movement with any identity and race. It's an ideology. Google social justice.
On October 13 2017 22:28 ChristianS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:01 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 21:40 ChristianS wrote:On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. A conviction isn't a requirement for pardon. He can pardon anyone for anything they did or did not do at any time after they did or did not do. Presidents can pardon someone for things they may or may not have done, thus preempting any criminal proceedings. Some people think pardoning allies for campaign malfeasance is the line he can't cross without congressional republicans starting to consider impeachment, but I think it's quite likely that if Kushner got charged, Trump would immediately pardon with the argument that the charges are bullshit and he wants his team to go back to work instead of fighting bullshit criminal charges. And the rest of the world would think "that's fucked up" but not do anything about it. Just like all the other fucked up shit he's said and done. Danglars would probably still consider him a "necessary evil." Which is why I just argued that a conviction/pardon of his son-in-law would be a big thing against someone that didn't think it would be one. You should really substitute my real arguments for your contortions of them and assumptions if you want to rise above the trolls. I never said you wouldn't think it was a big deal, just that it probably wouldn't move the dial for you on whether Trump was a "necessary evil." Is thst not true? That's a pleasant surprise. I asked once what Trump would have to do for you to consider him a mistake, and you refused to answer. That doesn't give me much choice besides guessing what your answer might be. There's no "real argument" to substitute.
He can be a historical impeached president that was also a necessary evil for the time. I still don't know why you ignored my past statements and imply there's some contradiction present.
|
On October 13 2017 22:27 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Danglars, from what I now understand of the use of the word "SJW", aren't you in effect perpetuating that very same identity politics and race-card politics that you decry?
As you can see above that requires a level of introspection that our boy is not capable of. He demands empathy and understanding, but will dismiss any other world view that requires him to do the same.
|
On October 13 2017 22:46 Furikawari wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:06 farvacola wrote:
Time for rural Trump voters to feel the effects of their vote. They'll blame everyone but Trump.
In this case I think people will actually blame Trump when their healthcare goes to shit. It's easy for his base to give him the benefit of the doubt when he's insulting brown people or sticking it to the libruls but if premiums start skyrocketing the guy at the top will be held responsible.
My guess is that he's trying to use this as a negotiating tactic to get Democrats to vote for whatever shitty healthcare bill the Republicans come up with next. The old "I'll shoot my hostage if you don't give me what I want" approach to policy. In this case the hostage is his own base though so it doesn't seem like a great idea to me.
|
On October 13 2017 22:57 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:21 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 22:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 22:02 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:57 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 21:18 Nebuchad wrote:On October 13 2017 21:09 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 16:53 mortyFromRickAndMort wrote:
Well unless it's a black, m-2-f transgender disabled Muslim socialist, the SJW faction won't be satisfied, so any reasonably sane Republican will win by default. I've seen enough leftists in this thread both understand the label and reject it. It's a positive thing that it has this stigma and people that make primarily identity arguments and race-card arguments flee from it. Can't have this conversation in a vacuum my friend That was just an aside to why there's hope. Anything else on the actual post aside from your quoted segment? It was pretty much an answer to your whole post. Identity politics aren't good or bad in a vacuum. Your attempt to encourage leftist views that it is bad strategically cannot be separated from your initial misguided thought that they are bad in a vacuum. I said it in light of the forumgoers here and informatively to morty. I can't really make sense of your comment. I'm not making some point-by-point defense that SJW-ism and identity politics and race-card politics are bad, I'm just observing the stigma in the past and (unquoted portion) elaborating on its proponents and makeup. On October 13 2017 21:29 Artisreal wrote:On October 13 2017 21:14 Danglars wrote:On October 13 2017 20:38 Gahlo wrote:On October 13 2017 10:24 Tachion wrote:Kushner is untouchable. Undisclosed meetings and contacts, secret back channels, hiding e-mails, undisclosed finances, none of it seems to matter. He could turn up with a body in his trunk and probably get away with "Oh, I don't know how that got there". He never should have even been in his position in the first place due to anti-nepotism laws, and yet there he stays. No point in going after him now when Trump can just pardon it. On October 13 2017 21:00 Artisreal wrote:
There's a lot of merit in forcing him to do so and a conviction, which I unknowingly assume is a prerequisite for a pardon, would be immensely significant. Are people really so insane to think a conviction of Kushner and a presidential pardon is meaningless? Or that prosecutors aren't biting at the bit for anything provable? I know people here are obsessed with demonizing Trump supporters, but a son-in-law "untouchable" because of conviction then pardon is ridiculous. Why did you include my post? I literally said what you said. It was mainly to acknowledge and reiterate. I also wondered why Gahlo would think it was insignificant in the first place. Would you disagree with the notion that identity politics are inherently bad? You should, this notion is demonstrably false, but I can't make sense of your worldview if you do disagree with it, including but not limited to your strategical tips for the left. I think its current practice is at levels that are absolutely bad. I know past apartheid and slavery made it necessary and it can be an important minor force if political debate swings back.
Wouldn't it then make more sense for the left to refocus its use of identity politics in the directions where it makes sense to use them (according to you) rather than to drop them entirely?
If the left gives up on identity politics, the right isn't going to pick them up, so we just lose them as a whole. Seems like the wrong thing to advocate, strategically or not, if you do think they can have a positive impact on situations and be used for good.
|
On October 13 2017 22:57 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2017 22:46 Furikawari wrote:On October 13 2017 22:06 farvacola wrote:
Time for rural Trump voters to feel the effects of their vote. They'll blame everyone but Trump. Nah, nothing Trump has done thus far will viscerally hurt these voters the way ending the insurance subsidies will and many Republican state politicians are already feeling the heat. We'll have to agree to disagree until this shitshow shakes out more A lot of the Trump voters I grew up with are besides themselves this morning.
One thing the CBO analysis ignores (or rather something that falls outside the scope of their analysis) is the downstream effects of cutting the risk payments. Not only will insurers retreat from the rural areas, but the providers there who are already struggling might just end up closing shop or reducing their footprint as well. In some areas, it's not going to be a case of "can't pay for insurance" it's gonna be "can't even find a doctor". It's gonna be fucking bad.
|
Yep, many rural areas (or pretty much the entire state of West Virginia, for example lol) are going to get blasted so hard by this that I wouldn't be surprised to see mortality rates kick up a few points in only a relatively short while. Like, once the only dialysis center for 100 miles closes, good luck poor folks with kidney problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
