right, but in fact we did not, and here we are. how do they deal with that?
it’s fair to say they have been. i wonder if anything has changed.
so, are centrist Democrats for or against at this point some combination of wealth tax / progressive income tax that would render accumulations of wealth at Musk, Bezos, or even Gates levels unsustainable?
cf poverty and increasing marginal utility rortybomb.wordpress.com/2009/12/03/p...
did all the cancer programs in the original CR ultimately get funded, or just a portion?
kind of a claim suggested by Noah Smith, where he describes the way Musk exercises power as “fundamentally…democratic…if he’s able to primary Congressional Republicans, it’s bc his primary challengers are able to win votes…if he’s able to start a rage-mob on X, it’s bc ppl like what he says.”
What are the checks and balances on the power of Elon Musk?
Link Preview: What are the checks and balances on the power of Elon Musk?: The question we'll all be asking over the next year or more.if we were to expand defense expenditures to 5% of GDP, i wonder how adept the new administration would be at ensuring the funds expand capacity and competition among defense suppliers rather than bid up prices.
Loading quoted Bluesky post...
since we have now all read ChatGPT responses and seen Midjourney pics, all of our creative work is now derivative of AI. soon we’ll be required to pay licensing fees.
hell as a most fascinating terrarium we all can tap the glass.
the scale of the moneycane in health care is huge, lots of problems may seem comparatively minor in quantitative terms while large relative to personal finances. but it matters that from a patient perspective it’s misleading, a scam. it seems a lot, and is corrosive to any sense of legitimacy.
Great call! Finally (for all the rows), it's clear that "Plain paid" is $0.00.
Basically, it feels like much of how US health insurance works is like Las Vegas hotel/casino comps. 1/
The hotel rooms, the hotel restaurant dramatically inflate undiscounted top-line prices, so that when high rollers are comped, the value of their benefit relative to the puffed-up prices seems gratifyingly large. 2/
right. but if the way they make the numbers add up stomps on their paying customers and them fibs to them about it, it's not a wonder those paying customers get pretty mad about it!
Cross-subsidies are in general inferior to tax support, they concentrate the burden of support on arbitrary groups of related payers who no more ought to "owe" the supported than the rest of us should for ensuring everyone can participate. Sliding-scale pricing sounds more "progressive" than it is.
I guess I think if this number is not separately accounted (it can be pooled and netted when it's paid, but there should be a line for it), it's misleading to represent it as a benefit to the insured. These statements are making an affirmative claim. The amounts are large. They should be accurate.
so that would be embedded in the $1K I might actually pay them (I will try to negotiate it down), not in the $3.5K-$6K various presentations are representing as an insurance benefit, right? 1/
from a user benefit perspective, it's kind of insult to injury. after fake benefits, the price patients pay is padded to help cover indigents. a good cause, for sure! 2/

