>So Trump says that he’ll replace the current system, in which people buy their own health insurance with the aid of government subsidies, with a system in which the government gives people money they can use to buy their own health insurance. How is that different?
That's kinda the history of modern efforts to rework the health system in the US. No fundamental change, just subsidies, subsidies moved around (often with an apparent misunderstanding of how things "work") or not.
The old joke from the first Trump term when congress actually seemed capable of trying to do some things on their own was that the GOP was going to replace Obama Care with the Affordable Care act ;). And as if to demonstrate how absurd that whole effort was, Trump himself would one day voice support for congressional efforts, and the next rant about it ... GOP congress people openly voiced "we don't know what he wants an he won't tell us".
Congress ultimately chose to do pretty much nothing that round.
The root cause of America's healthcare problems is the high prices that are caused by an artificial constraint on new doctors allowed to be licensed each year. Plus all the other over-regulation.
Developments in technology, innovation, and commerce are all inherently value-laden, because those things are nothing without their users and their uses and their contexts, and values are politics. Eliminating politics from HN just means eliminating HN.
I notice that your style of pleading appears only ever on articles of a very particular subject category, namely conversations highlighting a particular US group being liars and grifters and abusers, and not on any of the other inherently political subjects discussed on HN, like
software freedom,
the value of historical preservation,
the moral position of hacking,
libel,
the justice of DRM,
privacy and the inherent injustice and dangers of televisions monitoring what you watch,
how old is old enough to use social media,
AI eliminating, or not eliminating, people's livelihoods that they depend on to eat, house, and clothe themselves,
whether AI training data is spying, stealing, or fair use,
the human value of AI-generated media,
whether warrants should be needed to access data about you,
whether data about you is yours,
the relationship between increased accumulation and centralization of wealth and decreased personal autonomy,
and so on.
I find it strange how participants in your refrain don't seem to see the politics in those conversations, only in this particular one. It's almost like your values and politics are showing. This suggests to me a non-rigorous understanding of the reach of what politics means and where it comes from.
>So Trump says that he’ll replace the current system, in which people buy their own health insurance with the aid of government subsidies, with a system in which the government gives people money they can use to buy their own health insurance. How is that different?
That's kinda the history of modern efforts to rework the health system in the US. No fundamental change, just subsidies, subsidies moved around (often with an apparent misunderstanding of how things "work") or not.
The old joke from the first Trump term when congress actually seemed capable of trying to do some things on their own was that the GOP was going to replace Obama Care with the Affordable Care act ;). And as if to demonstrate how absurd that whole effort was, Trump himself would one day voice support for congressional efforts, and the next rant about it ... GOP congress people openly voiced "we don't know what he wants an he won't tell us".
Congress ultimately chose to do pretty much nothing that round.
The root cause of America's healthcare problems is the high prices that are caused by an artificial constraint on new doctors allowed to be licensed each year. Plus all the other over-regulation.
Too bad we cannot eliminate the politics from HN
Developments in technology, innovation, and commerce are all inherently value-laden, because those things are nothing without their users and their uses and their contexts, and values are politics. Eliminating politics from HN just means eliminating HN.
I notice that your style of pleading appears only ever on articles of a very particular subject category, namely conversations highlighting a particular US group being liars and grifters and abusers, and not on any of the other inherently political subjects discussed on HN, like
software freedom,
the value of historical preservation,
the moral position of hacking,
libel,
the justice of DRM,
privacy and the inherent injustice and dangers of televisions monitoring what you watch,
how old is old enough to use social media,
AI eliminating, or not eliminating, people's livelihoods that they depend on to eat, house, and clothe themselves,
whether AI training data is spying, stealing, or fair use,
the human value of AI-generated media,
whether warrants should be needed to access data about you,
whether data about you is yours,
the relationship between increased accumulation and centralization of wealth and decreased personal autonomy,
and so on.
I find it strange how participants in your refrain don't seem to see the politics in those conversations, only in this particular one. It's almost like your values and politics are showing. This suggests to me a non-rigorous understanding of the reach of what politics means and where it comes from.