11–20 of 42 posts
[flagged]
HN votes are a not designed to be "agree/disagree", they supposed to mark interesting comments that spark curiosity, even if I disagree with them. Your comment is the only one like that here.
[flagged]
> Are we supposed to accept the idea that an IV drug user sharing needles contracts HIV and they never have to work again even though they'll be getting medication which completely suppresses the virus and will leave a largely normal lifespan? Is that the price of the “right” people being exempted? Then sure. Also simply having HIV doesn’t mean you’re terminally ill.
[flagged]
With treatment they might be able to live, work and recover. That is what the article is saying. Without insurance people die from cancer. With insurance some people do not die. If we cut their insurance due to more red tape, we're condemning those to death.
[flagged]
[flagged]
Maybe your argument works for a few specific cases, what about those that do not meet that? What about someone with stage 4 cancer who needs radiation and will likely live a year or two longer without treatment? Without treatment they can't recover, without recovering they can't go to work; their body is literally dying. With treatment they might be able to live, work and recover. That is what the article is saying.…
[flagged]
On par with this administration- Goons pulled back because they're murdering innocent civilians at car stops? Chief goon steps up and says "put them back!"
Then he takes to the waves to instill fear and uncertainty in our election process.
Americans are being boiled alive, nice and slow- and a third of them love it!
This just sounds cartoonishly evil
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49089109 (citations)
[flagged]