Dude. I reread it dude. It does not read that way. Others have even said that’s not what I said. It could be misconstrued that way, but that’s exactly what it is. A misconstruction.
You’re just having a hard time because there’s nuance. I was expressing something that doesn’t scream that I hate the way things work, but that what the person was saying seemed outlandish. This being the internet, it’s hard when things aren’t “I believe X” and “well, I hate X, I’m a Y’er!” There is a range of conversation from disagreement on the subject to disagreement on the discussion to literally so much nuance in between. You just think because I said something that someone could say in a screed about supporting the system.
The gross inequity of for-profit healthcare means there is a ton of money to be made. Logically, that attracts high quality doctors—for those that can afford it. It shouldn’t be that way. But it is.
Just because you read the word “quality” in association with the US healthcare system doesn’t mean I support it. Recognizing trends and truths about things that may be construed as a positive for issues you don’t agree with does not mean you support the idea. Ignoring those truths just because they don’t jibe with you worldview is beyond ignorant.
Creating an unequal system that means access is limited to those with insane amounts of money will lead to higher amounts of money for people taking it from the rich people. Acknowledging that should be a pretty basic truth. But this is the time of internet two-sidesism, where people routinely ignore and deny basic realities because it doesn’t help their argument is fucking dumb. But that’s the temperature of the water we’re swimming in. So it struck you as strange that I wouldn’t do mental gymnastics to ignore a fact that’s gross, even if it could be construed as a positive for people who support it.
Look man. This comment is actually very different to your initial comment, and honestly it sounds very reasonable to me.
But can you explain to me what you were trying to say in the original comment please? Again, to me it reads like you are saying “rich and famous people are not whitening their teeths in the USA” which is factually incorrect. And to top it off, it looks like you are saying “it’s impossible for rich people to get bad healthcare in the US because they have money”, which is non sense as shown by this example of teeth whitening. And the more I read this comment, plus your very rude response (“are you okay?” Seriously dude, that’s no way to have a conversation even if you were right), the more it looks like this is what you are saying. And that’s what I was answering to.
I’m not saying, and I never said, that you think the healthcare system in the US is good. But the more I re read your comments, the less I understand what you were trying to say if it’s not what I “quoted” above.
It’s not though. All I said is that people with tons of money can get the best care in the world—available in the US. That’s not a condemnation of socialized medicine, that’s not an endorsement of privatized medicine. That’s me saying exactly what I’m saying in this comment in another way. These people can afford the best. Because they’re rich as fuck.
Subtext: BEING RICH SHOULD NOT BE A HURDLE TO GOOD HEALTHCARE.
They’re in LA. A place that attracts plastic surgeons, orthodontists, dentists, any doctor that deals in appearance. Because they make insane money with their celebrity clientele.
So many Hollywood actors are nepo babies. They have cosmetic doctors that can do anything and everything at the right cost. I don’t have the data, but I’d be willing to bet it’s a majority of them that come from famous Hollywood parents. They are in Hollywood because they were born into it. They grew up with Hollywood level beautification health care. That includes teeth.
Dude. I reread it dude. It does not read that way. Others have even said that’s not what I said. It could be misconstrued that way, but that’s exactly what it is. A misconstruction.
You’re just having a hard time because there’s nuance. I was expressing something that doesn’t scream that I hate the way things work, but that what the person was saying seemed outlandish. This being the internet, it’s hard when things aren’t “I believe X” and “well, I hate X, I’m a Y’er!” There is a range of conversation from disagreement on the subject to disagreement on the discussion to literally so much nuance in between. You just think because I said something that someone could say in a screed about supporting the system.
The gross inequity of for-profit healthcare means there is a ton of money to be made. Logically, that attracts high quality doctors—for those that can afford it. It shouldn’t be that way. But it is.
https://www.physiciansweekly.com/how-do-us-physician-salaries-compare-with-those-abroad/
Look at the difference there.
Just because you read the word “quality” in association with the US healthcare system doesn’t mean I support it. Recognizing trends and truths about things that may be construed as a positive for issues you don’t agree with does not mean you support the idea. Ignoring those truths just because they don’t jibe with you worldview is beyond ignorant.
Creating an unequal system that means access is limited to those with insane amounts of money will lead to higher amounts of money for people taking it from the rich people. Acknowledging that should be a pretty basic truth. But this is the time of internet two-sidesism, where people routinely ignore and deny basic realities because it doesn’t help their argument is fucking dumb. But that’s the temperature of the water we’re swimming in. So it struck you as strange that I wouldn’t do mental gymnastics to ignore a fact that’s gross, even if it could be construed as a positive for people who support it.
Look man. This comment is actually very different to your initial comment, and honestly it sounds very reasonable to me.
But can you explain to me what you were trying to say in the original comment please? Again, to me it reads like you are saying “rich and famous people are not whitening their teeths in the USA” which is factually incorrect. And to top it off, it looks like you are saying “it’s impossible for rich people to get bad healthcare in the US because they have money”, which is non sense as shown by this example of teeth whitening. And the more I read this comment, plus your very rude response (“are you okay?” Seriously dude, that’s no way to have a conversation even if you were right), the more it looks like this is what you are saying. And that’s what I was answering to.
I’m not saying, and I never said, that you think the healthcare system in the US is good. But the more I re read your comments, the less I understand what you were trying to say if it’s not what I “quoted” above.
It’s not though. All I said is that people with tons of money can get the best care in the world—available in the US. That’s not a condemnation of socialized medicine, that’s not an endorsement of privatized medicine. That’s me saying exactly what I’m saying in this comment in another way. These people can afford the best. Because they’re rich as fuck.
Subtext: BEING RICH SHOULD NOT BE A HURDLE TO GOOD HEALTHCARE.
They’re in LA. A place that attracts plastic surgeons, orthodontists, dentists, any doctor that deals in appearance. Because they make insane money with their celebrity clientele.
So many Hollywood actors are nepo babies. They have cosmetic doctors that can do anything and everything at the right cost. I don’t have the data, but I’d be willing to bet it’s a majority of them that come from famous Hollywood parents. They are in Hollywood because they were born into it. They grew up with Hollywood level beautification health care. That includes teeth.