>Imagine being sick, having no insurance, maybe no job...
Sorry no.
Long term unemployed people in the US qualify for free medical care, celphones and basic dental work. The process is arduous, yes, but it is comprehensive. I had entire recurring blood panels, multiple MRIs, neurological impairment tests , every hospital visit and all of my prescriptions provided for free.
Lumping all levels of poor together is just lies that obfuscates larger issues.
And other articles too. People inside the USA, travelling ( sometimes for days) to queue (sometimes for days) for a dentist. Why are there organistations in the US whose purpose for existence is to travel around, providing free dental care to any and all comers? Like a medical mission to a country suffering enormous poverty.
I think the cue is at “Virginia is one of 19 states refusing federal dollars to close the healthcare “coverage gap” for people not poor enough for Medicaid, but too poor for anything else.“
I am way out of my depth; why would a state refuse that money? What is the cost of accepting it that 19 US states feel is too high? Not demanding this of you specifically; maybe someone, anyone, can answer.
As the sibling commenter mentioned, it is a political decision to take federal funds, which sometimes goes against the best interest of the electorate (not claiming to be the case here but seems like so when we read such articles).
the argument they made is the money is temporary. After a few years the federal money goes away and the state has to foot the entire bill so they would rather just refuse the program entirely. This is their public reasoning but the reality is more that it is program proposed by Obama so they just want to refuse it on political principle
What program are you referring to? AFAIK, This is only in states that expanded Medicaid so it's a real situation for millions in states that didn't. Or are you talking about some other program?
California programs, so yes expanded Medicaid. But as the state that consumes the most in welfare, it seems highly relevant when discussing the needs of the 'poor'.
Programs: California Medi-cal (which covered all of my medications, tests, etc), Denti-cal (all dental work thats not cosmetic), my obama phone, calfresh (for ebt food) and calworks (cash monthly stipend) are the only programs I can speak to.
I'm grateful for what I had to fight to receive during a bad period of my life and hate seeing misrepresentations like this being spread without specific context.
Had I not been able to finally get working again, I would have eventually qualified for free housing, utilities and all the other benefits available from programs that are funded from various sources. I made several friends through the course of going to these offices over a long period of time who were admittedly worse off than me (mentally) but somehow knew all the inside information on how to game the system. (Ex: if you are considered impaired you can get free bus/subway/van service card, which they all knew how to easily acquire). I had to ride my bicycle or walk everywhere to get back and forth from these appointments.
I'm glad you were able to get healthcare, but the parent comment you're responding to and your own comment are both talking about the entire US. What you wrote is simply false. There are 14 states that still haven't expanded Medicaid and millions of poor people are without health insurance. California isn't the US and pretending like it is misleading and helps no one.
By that definition literally nothing that is produced/provided by humans is free, and I feel like it's unhelpful to insist on such narrow definition of free. Everyone here knows exactly what OP meant by that and there is nothing to be gained by pointing out that free healthcare was paid for by someone else - of course it was.
How is the WSJ's credibility any better than a blog?
>The Wall Street Journal is the most trusted news source in the country, according to the index, with 57.7% of Americans trusting it.
All polls are biased based on how you ask questions.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tonysilber/2018/10/03/the-wall-...
I'd say little more than half the poll is about as irrelevant as a blog. Either you trust something because of confirmation bias or you don't.
Disregarding blogs as somehow being less credible, holds traditional media to a higher standard which they have chosen to abandon for partisan reporting over the past 10 years.
Other random sources for comparison/counterpoints:
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/wall-street-journal/https://poorvucenter.yale.edu/writing/using-sources/principl...
How is the WSJ's credibility any better than a blog
If you seriously don't know the difference between a 129-year-old newspaper that has won countless journalism awards, has broken world-changing news, is respected both among its peers and by millions of readers versus some rando blog, then I really don't know what to tell you.
WSJ takes huge legal risks in order to provide honest, ground-breaking reporting that makes society better. They were responsible, for example, for the Theranos exposé.
But you see it was your own blindness that caused you not to realize what the hand was holding, though your subconscious expressed it. Of course you can't see this!
Yes I am being sarcastic but I actually heard this kind of comment about my then wife's work.
It isn't all that silly an idea that there is information encoded into the work that the creator didn't intend to be there.
Some of the best literature works with characters rather than plot. I can easily see how an author trying to work accurately with characters based on generic memories of how someone should behave would actually leave a lot of evidence for interpretations they didn't expect.
Author's intent is important, but sometimes even the author will stand up and say their not quite sure what their characters would do in a given situation.
As engineers we usually have a direct conscious intention for the details of our creation.
Art doesn't work that way. The art piece is a piece of the artist and her surroundings. Including her conscious intentions, the naturalized social norms, her deep subconscious urges and desires, And with today's commoditized art, it includes the preferences of the collective unconscious.
Literary analysis have plenty to work with. Diminishing art to the artist intentions does injustice to culture.
I don't tend to read the name of the author of an article, because there is essentially zero chance that I'll remember the name and frankly I don't care who they are.
I suspect that most people tend to read in their own gender in absence of other cues? I have a strong memory of going through the first chapter of a book completely misgendering the protaganist. Fortunately it wasn't a "doctor -> man" bias situation, just "person walking through park describing view/situation", otherwise I'd have been super angry at myself.
I was taking the HN preferred side of giving the poster the benefit of the best possible interpretation, which in this case means in the condition of proper pronoun usage, English defaults to male pronouns for the unknown, or sometimes an ambiguous they. I don't read names in the modern age because I have no clue what foreign names are male or female. Nor would I be so bold as to assume.
> If the original title begins with a number or number + gratuitous adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it. E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys." Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids."
> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.
Severe depression leads to isolating behaviors. If you're not so depressed that you are able to leave the house and go somewhere, you're ahead of the game and excercise is just icing on the cake.
That still doesn't mean that he wasn't depressed though. I've experienced the same thing. I struggled with depression in my 20's but I found that if I was able to drag myself out of the house and get on my bike, I'd feel better within minutes. However, the huge struggle was getting out of bed and walking outside in the first place.
When I was younger I think I was depressed. It got to the stage where people would talk to me and I wouldn't talk back, I'd just stare; I'd lie in bed doing nothing; I let my hair grow long because I didn't want to go outside or talk to a barber.
I'm much better now, and I think exercise was one of the key things that improved my general mood. It was a constant sturggle though for a while.
YMMV, of course, and I was never diagnosed or anything.
The floor is always available for pushups, but the social benefits of exercise are also worthwhile in combatting depression. Severe depression is another story, but most depressed people are not severely depressed.
Ratings are imperfect censorship tools that evolve over time.
PG-13 was created specifically for Indiana Jones Temple of Doom because there was no rating between PG and R.
Content that fits in these boxes is not the same from year to year. Not just with regards to violence or language, but casual topless women that were commonplace in the 70s is no longer PG/PG-13 acceptable.
Sorry no.
Long term unemployed people in the US qualify for free medical care, celphones and basic dental work. The process is arduous, yes, but it is comprehensive. I had entire recurring blood panels, multiple MRIs, neurological impairment tests , every hospital visit and all of my prescriptions provided for free.
Lumping all levels of poor together is just lies that obfuscates larger issues.