this post was submitted on 21 Oct 2024
753 points (97.8% liked)

News

23287 readers
4563 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
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I did answer, I think that should be negotiated between the insurer and insuree, and should not be required to be covered.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

and should not be required to be covered.

Got it. You want to cost everyone more money in the long term.

Every new case of breast or colon cancer that isn't caught early raises everyone's premiums. You know what prevents those? Breast and colon cancer.

You know what costs taxpayers a lot of money? Unwanted kids.

So your "let's have everyone pay more money rather than have insurance do basic preventative care" plan still makes no sense to me.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Got it. You want to cost everyone more money in the long term.

No?

Every new case of breast or colon cancer that isn’t caught early raises everyone’s premiums. You know what prevents those? Breast and colon cancer.

Insurance companies want lower costs, if that is the reality they would offer screening even if not required. I'm not educated on the topic enough to evalutate it, but there is growing evidence that cancer(and other things) are over-screened. Tumors and other things that may not become cancerous or spread quickly are identified, causing stress and harmful surgery for patients that might not actually need it. I tend to believe more information is better, but, I'm not a doctor, and a lot of doctors are critical of overscreening in terms of outcomes for patients.

Edit: here's a link to read a bit about this

You know what costs taxpayers a lot of money? Unwanted kids.

The job of an insurer is not to save tax payers money. If you want free condoms, just give out free condoms, why does it have to be tied to health insurance?

So your “let’s have everyone pay more money rather than have insurance do basic preventative care” plan still makes no sense to me.

Where did I say that?

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I am not seeing any doctors in a cursory search saying that people should not be screened for breast and colon cancer at all.

Also, why is the job of an insurer not to save taxpayer money? Because you say so? Maybe if we made that part of the cost of owning a business, we would be able to have more social services.

But something tells me you don't want more social services just like you apparently want unwanted babies from people who would otherwise be able to afford birth control if their insurance took care of it.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I am not seeing any doctors in a cursory search saying that people should not be screened for breast and colon cancer at all.

Where did I say that?? If you don't stop engaging in bad faith I won't respond.

Also, why is the job of an insurer not to save taxpayer money?

Do you think McDonald's should be required to open a shipyard as a loss to save the navy money on warships? Because its simply not their job.

Maybe if we made that part of the cost of owning a business, we would be able to have more social services.

Businesses already pay tax, also insurers are already required to cover screening>

But something tells me you don’t want more social services just like you apparently want unwanted babies from people who would otherwise be able to afford birth control if their insurance took care of it.

Do you think health insurance should be required to buy homes for people? Or help them pay for gas? No? So you want people to be homeless?

What you're advocating is a type of fascism called corporatism. You want a merger between the responsibilities and goals of the state and "private" companies. This type of merger tends to be deeply profitable for politicians and companies- see the military industrial complex.

You're not giving a good reason why the government just buying a condom factory and giving condoms out for free wouldn't be more efficient, since you're so concerned about saving money for the tax payer.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I like how you keep suggesting that I keep putting words in your mouth and yet you keep asking me silly rhetorical questions which have nothing to do with what I said. Not at all dishonest.