Topic: There is an artificial scarcity of housing and doctors to protect guild profits.
Proletarian Liberation Frunt started this discussion 10 months ago #111,684
Millionaire drug dealers in clean white coats, and feudal landlords blocking new construction.
Underlying both power is the violence of the state! By that we mean not the symbolic Congress, but the street cops killing and imprisoning and stealing from anyone would would oppose this system.
Underlying both power is the violence of the state! By that we mean not the symbolic Congress, but the street cops killing and imprisoning and stealing from anyone would would oppose this system.
Phatthew Phosteet Philler joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 14 minutes later[^] [v] #1,240,629
@OP
At the end of the day, it's the law of the land. Thanks.
At the end of the day, it's the law of the land. Thanks.
Proletarian Liberation Frunt (OP) replied with this 10 months ago, 5 hours later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,635
boof joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 41 minutes later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,636
In order to finance tax cuts for the monied elite, austerity measures ensured not enough, or often none at all, publicly funded housing would be built for three or so decades.
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 6 hours later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,650
Whom would have thought restricting supply leads to higher prices and/or shortages!?
What a surprise.
What a surprise.
Phatthew Phosteet Philler replied with this 10 months ago, 1 hour later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,651
@1,240,635 (Proletarian Liberation Frunt)
You're not making the point you think you're making. Thanks.
You're not making the point you think you're making. Thanks.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 39 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,654
@1,240,650 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
And, also critically, reducing the freedom to choose a doctor trained (or not) as the patient finds most appropriate then placing virtually all medication and treatment behind lock and key. Who would've thought that'd lead to problems...
And, also critically, reducing the freedom to choose a doctor trained (or not) as the patient finds most appropriate then placing virtually all medication and treatment behind lock and key. Who would've thought that'd lead to problems...
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 23 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,659
Welcome to America 🇺🇸
Proletarian Liberation Frunt (OP) replied with this 10 months ago, 4 hours later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,686
@1,240,654 (E)
That's a matter of whether you have an HMO or PPO.
HMOs have free reign to block access to treatments by understaffing. When you can't see a doctor because they are overbooked, insurance never has to pay for treatment because delays are endless.
PPO let's you pick your own doctor/provider, so that's not an issue, but everything is still overpriced regardless of what insurance you have because of artificial scarcity.
If your insurance won't let you pick a doctor, you have an HMO.
That's a matter of whether you have an HMO or PPO.
HMOs have free reign to block access to treatments by understaffing. When you can't see a doctor because they are overbooked, insurance never has to pay for treatment because delays are endless.
PPO let's you pick your own doctor/provider, so that's not an issue, but everything is still overpriced regardless of what insurance you have because of artificial scarcity.
If your insurance won't let you pick a doctor, you have an HMO.
(Edited 48 seconds later.)
Proletarian Liberation Frunt (OP) double-posted this 10 months ago, 1 minute later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,687
@1,240,651 (Phatthew Phosteet Philler)
Bad laws cause a lot of suffering, bad laws can also go away if people organize and protest those laws.
Bad laws cause a lot of suffering, bad laws can also go away if people organize and protest those laws.
Anonymous E replied with this 10 months ago, 15 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,692
@1,240,686 (Proletarian Liberation Frunt)
Impressive. None of what you said has anything to do with what I was talking about.
Impressive. None of what you said has anything to do with what I was talking about.
Phatthew Phosteet Philler replied with this 10 months ago, 5 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,693
@1,240,687 (Proletarian Liberation Frunt)
It's not for us to decide which laws are good and bad. If you keep your nose clean, there's nothing to worry about.
It's not for us to decide which laws are good and bad. If you keep your nose clean, there's nothing to worry about.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 10 months ago, 9 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,698
@1,240,692 (E)
> reducing the freedom to choose a doctor trained (or not) as the patient finds most appropriate
This is an HMO thing, not something the law does.
> reducing the freedom to choose a doctor trained (or not) as the patient finds most appropriate
This is an HMO thing, not something the law does.
Anonymous E replied with this 10 months ago, 4 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,699
@previous (A)
The fact that I must go to someone who has an MD or DO to get medication, or have any non-trivial medical procedure done has nothing to do with insurance and has everything to do with the law.
The fact that I must go to someone who has an MD or DO to get medication, or have any non-trivial medical procedure done has nothing to do with insurance and has everything to do with the law.
(Edited 28 seconds later.)
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 10 months ago, 2 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,700
Phatthew Phosteet Philler replied with this 10 months ago, 7 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,701
Proletarian Liberation Frunt (OP) replied with this 10 months ago, 8 minutes later, 19 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,703
Anonymous E replied with this 10 months ago, 7 minutes later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,240,706
If the value of having an MD or DO were as great as it's purported, we wouldn't need to require those degrees and credentials by law to "practice medicine". The public would naturally only go to people who had those credentials.
Requiring a license to practice medicine is a tacit admission that these credentials are not valuable enough to stand on their own and instead the freedom of the public must be infringed upon to prop up that particular segment of the industry. This isn't like regulating construction, building codes or anything else that effects the public at large. This is about a decision that one makes about oneself that affects no one other than that person. There is no need or place for regulation here, other than to prevent active fraud and deception (like lying about credentials or training).
Medical doctors know they would get less business, receive less pay, and have less authority if millions of women were not forced to pay to see a gatekeeper to dole them out birth control medication (which many countries do not require and don't have millions dropping dead left and right). They'd lose money if the millions on blood pressure medication didn't have to constantly check-in just to have the same script and dosage approved year after year. And so on.
The worst out of all this though is the premise that an individual should not have complete autonomy over their body and that other people should be involved in one's own personal decision on how to alter their own body, their own internal chemistry any way they see fit. That is the most important right of all. And it's a right very few recognize and fewer take seriously.
Requiring a license to practice medicine is a tacit admission that these credentials are not valuable enough to stand on their own and instead the freedom of the public must be infringed upon to prop up that particular segment of the industry. This isn't like regulating construction, building codes or anything else that effects the public at large. This is about a decision that one makes about oneself that affects no one other than that person. There is no need or place for regulation here, other than to prevent active fraud and deception (like lying about credentials or training).
Medical doctors know they would get less business, receive less pay, and have less authority if millions of women were not forced to pay to see a gatekeeper to dole them out birth control medication (which many countries do not require and don't have millions dropping dead left and right). They'd lose money if the millions on blood pressure medication didn't have to constantly check-in just to have the same script and dosage approved year after year. And so on.
The worst out of all this though is the premise that an individual should not have complete autonomy over their body and that other people should be involved in one's own personal decision on how to alter their own body, their own internal chemistry any way they see fit. That is the most important right of all. And it's a right very few recognize and fewer take seriously.
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 10 months later, 10 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,293,834
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 8 hours later, 10 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,293,884
I've always dreamed about the housing crisis becoming a religious issue. You know what they say, without God everything is forbidden but with God everything is allowed.
Anonymous J joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 15 hours later, 10 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,293,954
@1,240,693 (Phatthew Phosteet Philler)
> It's not for us to decide which laws are good and bad. If you keep your nose clean, there's nothing to worry about.
Quite to the contrary, you have a moral obligation to defy any unjust law.
> It's not for us to decide which laws are good and bad. If you keep your nose clean, there's nothing to worry about.
Quite to the contrary, you have a moral obligation to defy any unjust law.