time is merely mans attempt to control his environment. clocks sole purpose is to create controllable sequences of events
Well, it isn’t free in the socialized healthcare countries, but taxes don’t go into the audit-dysfunctional defense budget and so you actually get your money worth (and others do too). But alas, people have their outgroups so we can’t have nice things.
I’ll just say, the United States Marine Corps has passed two audits on a row, the only branch to pass an audit, period. And so it’s obviously possible, and the fact that others can’t do it needs to be investigated more thoroughly.
The defense budget is entirely irrelevant to healthcare. We already spend multiple times the defense budget on Medicare and Medicaid, and another several times as much on health insurance premiums, copays, and coinsurance.
We could have universal healthcare without touching the defense budget at all, and it would still be cheaper than the system we currently have.
Because covid is contagious. If one thing is worse than death, it’s death that spreads, also know as a plague. Orders of magnitude worse. They change everyone’s history, not just your family’s.
is that also why the timestamps are conspicuously missing from this screenshot?
the gov benefits from a healthy, non-pleage riddled populous.
the only reason America is different is because your culture idolizes money and a selfish level of individualism. thats why your health care system, much like other aspects of your economy and socity, is pay to win.
Yeah turns out healthy people work more and pay more taxes, which the government likes
Clocks are circular because the repetitive nature of time with a mechanical convenience. Any philosophical connection is simply a matter of convenient circumstance.
Without judgment, I would point out that, and take this through what you will, the same could be said for literally every other religion. And, in my own opinion, with exactly exactly as much meaninglessness.
But digital clocks are rectangular… 🤔
Or formless, in essence. Just a bunch of ones and zeroes trapped in an interchangeable housing.
I could give you an answer, but it could take forever, and it would not only make zero sense, but I can guarantee that it will only make you more confused and angry by the second— to the point that you’d …
Well, you wouldn’t like it, that’s for sure
I strongly suggest that you take what you have left, and move on. Vengeance =! Justice, and trying to get either in this world, wow, that’s just gonna get you dead.
The best any of us can hope for his peace, and you can only get that by moving on
So you’ve just given up on life? 😟
Odd how I said to find peace and “move on” but you heard “give up on life”
The issue is the ever encroaching line of “I need this for basic survival” while people who are extracting the means for survival can’t seem to understand why ignoring the problem doesn’t solve their anxiety or continuing societal failures ensuring more and more people fall below the line of basic autonomy and survival.
Like “why do the Gays need to make so much noise” meets society forbidding gay marriage and classifying that entire way of being a an “illness” to justify past and future abuses
I this case, those who don’t want to suffer a prolonged and more dangerous pandemic because a few people are still pushing the Andrew wakefield hyper debunked MMR autism narrative, or any other social issue that makes finding peace extra difficult because you or your love ones are directly suffering or dying from these problems.
It’s like, offering someone some mindfulness advice after your dad poisoned their dog. Doesn’t help as much as you’d think.
I don’t frequently have these kinds of debates in public, but the closest I’ve ever gotten to talking a vaccine skeptic out of their position was when I came from the angle of, “these shots are free because insurance companies know they work, and they would rather eat the cost of 100 vaccines than have to pay for every hundredth person to be hospitalized with the flu for 3 days, which costs THEM $40k.”
Then they start going on about how the vaccine was rushed into production, and it didn’t need to go through FDA approval, which like yeah it was, but that doesn’t mean it’s unsafe.
For the most part the FDA is a giant waste of time, yes they do prevent unsafe products from getting onto the market but 99% of the time the product is safe, and the FDA is just this giant ball of red tape you have to cut through.
and it didn’t need to go through FDA approval, which like yeah it was, but that doesn’t mean it’s unsafe.
It was rushed, yes. And it didn’t go through the regular FDA process.
It did, however, go through the full FDA process. What they did was run stages of the FDA approval process in parallel that normally needed to be done in series. All the same steps were done, but they were doing stage III testing at the same time they did Stage II testing.
And, funnily, the vaccine which actually caused health problems wasn’t an MRNA, it was a traditionally developed vaccine (the J&J shot).
99% of the time the product is safe, and the FDA is just this giant ball of red tape you have to cut through.
Safe and effective are 2 different things that the FDA tests. Drugs aren’t always safe and they aren’t always effective. FDA testing forces pharmaceuticals to prove both things before giving their drugs to people.
It’s a lot of red tape, but it’s there because of things like Vioxx (an FDA failure and a result of “just trust us, it’s safe”) which ended up killing/injuring over 10000 people.
Yeppp, insurance companies want you to have to have health insurance, be perfectly healthy as long as possible, and die or recover quickly when you get something expensive like cancer. Vaccines are basically always going to be a good value proposition for them because most people should get them which spreads the cost of R&D and manufacturing out between most people in a way that hospital stays and designer drugs can’tm
Removed by mod
CEOs still only care because they can get a bigger bonus.
Removed by mod
The payouts don’t matter.
All money out matters to an insurer.
Those making the decisions undoubtedly have hedged portfolios
Insurance is generally written on risks that are not hedgable. What they care about is making sure their risks don’t all happen at the same time.
Removed by mod
Because one of those things is contagious, impacting consumers and laborers and therefore halting commerce until addressed. It was determined to be more profitable to give away free shots. Yay capitalism.
Yes, herd immunity is inapplicable to diabetes, cancer, or allergies.
Edit: Is there a way to generically refer to not OP but the original original poster? The guy, for example, who’s confused in this post (Jum). Is OOP standard?
Unfortunately I don’t think that it is standard, people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread too, so then the normal OP becomes the OOP, meaning the OP in the post would become the OOOP. Or we could use “Pre-Original-Original-Poster”…
people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread too
I’ve never understood that. That’s literally not the OP. The original poster is the one who posted the post, not a comment.
Using the word that way is antithetical to its very meaning. It’s like if I randomly started calling my cousin my grandfather, but unironically (side rant: “unironically” is used to mean “non-sarcastically,” because people can’t grasp the difference between sarcasm and irony 🤦♀️).
Anyway, you could refer to the “top-level comment,” but I don’t think there’s an acronym for that. But I’ve seen OC used, it’s just rare. OC can refer to any higher-level comment though as long as the context makes it clear which one it’s in reference to.
But the one who posted the post is not OOP. That’s OP. OOP is the one who posted the post that OP’s post refers to.
I guess the POOP would then be any OOPs from OOP’s post or prior…
Oh yeah I fully agree it’s stupid. OC of course can bring up more confusion since it usually means Original Content.
Oh yeah you’re right, I was thinking Orange County which shouldn’t cause much confusion, but Original Content could definitely be ambiguous with Original Comment. You’re right…
OOP
Object Oriented Person
Ornery and Officious Periodontologist
Orange Octagonal Polygon
Herd immunity wasn’t aplicable to COVID either
Care to explain, or do we not believe in the germ theory of disease now?
Cool, thank you!
OOP, yes
Unless of course OP’s comment refers to multiple other comments, in which case it’s OOPS
Fun fact: the Danish word for oops is “ups”, which makes it fun to receive packages from United Parcel Service here 😁
It’s the same in german, i was always saying i wouldn’t get my parcel because ups!
(although GLS is far worse)
Removed by mod
They did sort of try to just let it run its course. Dan Patrick even said on TV that a bunch of old people should sacrifice themselves to save the economy. Hell, even after it was found to have really spread and start killing everybody else too, Dr. Oz said we should send kids back to school because it would only result in 2-3% total mortality. They tried to do nothing. They tried to demonize wearing a mask. They tried to keep businesses and schools open. They really didn’t want to do anything differently, and they didn’t until cases and deaths skyrocketed. And there are still an embarrassing amount of people who think that the shots didn’t help and were actually harmful, most COVID deaths were not from COVID, and masks are for “woke libtards”. The post that we’re commenting on is far from an anomaly.
Removed by mod
I’m not saying that it was the government who did that calculation. I think that companies did that calculation. I think that losses in revenue and even worse forecasting led companies to loudly call for blanket changes in policies so that the bleeding could be stopped. And then they got massive loans to get through the tough times, and most of those were forgiven, so it was effectively a business stimulus package.
I think it had nothing to do with life value and everything to do with consumer confidence. A loud minority still wanted to go out, but that wasn’t adding up to a whole lot of money, and they were gonna soon run out of customers at the rate they were getting hospitalized. Not to mention the impact to the workforce.
I was just talking with my wife about flu shots. Health insurance covers an annual flu shot, and it’s because it lowers their cost to have as many people vaccinated as possible, even though they have to pay for that shot. Similar sort of calculation.
Removed by mod
I think I was always dimly aware of the notion, but one of the things that covid really highlighted for me was that people in power are able to put an actual cash figure on every human life.
“If we spend more than £X on a given solution to this problem, it will stop being financially worthwhile”
And £X+ was the point at which disabled people, or younger people, or both, or whoever, were just left to die. Governments spent a lot of money, for sure, but not a penny more than was necessary to keep the economy (somewhat) upright and their cronies in cocktails and bigger yachts.
I couldn’t believe that on the discovery of a deadly airborn virus, they decided to keep the airports open.
Even worse, the £X is the short-term financial gains. Reducing poverty and homelessnes DOES profit over long run, but we don’t have anyone at top competent enough to tradeoff it with “slightly less profit margins increased by next year.”
That each human being has an estimated cash value is something that was taught in school when I went at least. It was more related to how much a death costs estimated based on how much value the person could have brought in if alive.
What’s really wild is that every government has multiple numbers depending on what they’re spending on. The amount that their departments associated with it will spend to rescue a citizen held hostage is different from the amount they’ll spend to save a life from disease which is different from the amount any particular infrastructure related department will spend to save a life, which may all be different from each other, and may be different based on cause of death (my government will spend a lot more to save a life from a passenger train related death than from a freight train related death or an automobile death)
“If we spend more than £X on a given solution to this problem, it will stop being financially worthwhile”
Yup, it’s like the old recall equation from Fight Club.
a * b * c = x
It doesn’t matter how catastrophic the crashes are nor how many people, including kids, die as a result of them. The only thing that does matter is if the cost of a recall is cheaper than the estimated total cost of settlements.
*Yay American capitalism.
COVID shots weren’t given away for free, the government paid corporations for it with public money.
Public trials for new therapies cost billions. Pfizer and Moderna got this stage for free.
Excuse me, time is not a circle. Time is a cube.
But cubes have eight corners XD
You really wanna argue with that wall of text? Hehe
Thank you, Michael J Caboose.
man if seizures and hypoglycaemic episodes were contagious that medicine would be cheaper
To think the years we’ve been set back. The things society could provide for the people… It really makes me sad.
