hungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · edit-26 hours agorulelemmy.blahaj.zoneimagemessage-square91fedilinkarrow-up1655arrow-down118file-text
arrow-up1637arrow-down1imagerulelemmy.blahaj.zonehungryphrog@lemmy.blahaj.zone to 196@lemmy.blahaj.zone · edit-26 hours agomessage-square91fedilinkfile-text
minus-squareAqarius@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2arrow-down1·7 hours agoThat’s under the assumption that you’re actually getting them to a doctor and not just slapping the bandaid on and calling it a day.
minus-squareTheDoozer@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-26 hours agoAnd I would argue that in either case, stopping the bleeding is still the immediate goal.
minus-squareAqarius@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up1·2 hours agoAnd would be correct. But if we’re planning a health system, and I keep insisting on bandaids but refuse to even talk about anything else, my proposal is a bait-and-switch. That’s the problem, not UBI/NIT, as a concept.
That’s under the assumption that you’re actually getting them to a doctor and not just slapping the bandaid on and calling it a day.
And I would argue that in either case, stopping the bleeding is still the immediate goal.
And would be correct. But if we’re planning a health system, and I keep insisting on bandaids but refuse to even talk about anything else, my proposal is a bait-and-switch. That’s the problem, not UBI/NIT, as a concept.