• partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      160
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Between the two there is a big difference:

      One is a profession that can be a particularly dangerous way of life. Orders from above put you into place far from support, with limited resources, often in contact with hostiles on a daily basis. You’re often left to fend for yourself with only what you have on you against overwhelming odds. Command structures often pit you against your peers in petty internal politics around rank. The pay isn’t great, and those that stick with it for the long haul to make a lifetime of it often leave scared and mentally injured. It can be a thankless job in putting your life and health on the line to achieve the overall goal.

      The other profession usually involves wearing a uniform and enforcing USA’s geopolitical interests in other countries.

      • Custoslibera@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        49
        ·
        1 year ago

        You poor thing, maybe if your teachers were praised more you’d have been taught better and be less confused.

              • Custoslibera@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                I was attempting to be humorous; obviously that failed. Surprisingly it doesn’t seem to be apparent to many as to why America glorifies soldiers rather than teachers so I guess I’ll elaborate.

                Glorifying soldiers is a nationalistic practice designed to distract from the very real cost of war I.e. the death of young men and women to protect capitalist interests.

                It’s a tactic to encourage impressionable people to join ‘for glory’ or prestige when in reality there is very little of either. First hand accounts of literally any war will tell you this.

                You could use this same tactic for teachers but historically teaching is seen as a ‘woman’s’ job and so the existing value structures of our society preclude this profession from the same veneration. I.e. the patriarchy is why teachers aren’t glorified in the same way.

                • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I think it’s worth noting that the “glorifying soldiers” tactic doesn’t really work; the US military routinely falls short of recruiting goals, and among people who do join, patriotism isn’t a common given reason.

        • Bloodwoodsrisen@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          The public school system, especially middle which is age 11-13/14 I think, almost never used my accommodations :) at least college is better at that

    • jpeps@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      While travelling in the states, I was so perplexed to see that in some car parks where you’d expect to see disabled parking that there were parking spots for veterans.

    • sock@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      id argue that that’s not true but my roommate and his friend made me watch 30+ minutes of commentated (by my friends) WW2 footage. i had to be like “hey man with all due respect i get the appeal I think but im not really interested in the glorification of something this horrific im sorry.” they were understanding but that level of interest in something so bleek was crazy.

      also they were using WW2 japenese slurs and saying id walk up to that if i were there. and im like NO THE FUCK YOU WOULDNT you wouldnt even make it out of the armored car that took you there bud. people are not as badass as they think they are and soldiers arent badass they just want to see their families again we dont have to cheer them on like the opposing side doesnt also just wanna go home to their families.

      ugh

  • merridew@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    162
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sticker price isn’t the price you pay at the till. Why? Why do you do that.

    Massive gaps between the walls and doors of public lavatory cubicles. This is not some mystical, advanced technology. Get it together.

    • orphiebaby@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      We do that because our country is founded on the “right” for moneymakers to put as much onto the customer as they can get away with. Hence things like tipping culture.

      • LUHG@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        No offense but how thick do you have to be to make a door that is put in place solely to shield you from other humans, have a massive gap?

        It seriously boggles my mind.

    • atomicorange@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think the toilet wall thing is because we have an expectation that every public building must have public toilets available. Places don’t want you to fuck or shoot up in the bathrooms, so they make them un-private so you hurry the hell up and leave. It’s a bit of hostile architecture, like making park benches that you can’t lie down on to keep people from trying to sleep on them. Make the “undesirables” uncomfortable enough and maybe they’ll go be undesirable somewhere else. Meanwhile it’s just a little bit less nice for everyone else as well.

      • merridew@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        28
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is a thoughtful reply. I will just say that the UK also has public toilets all over the place, and a desire for people to not screw & get high in the cubicles. Ditto many other countries. But I’ve never been anywhere else with this door gap problem, where no-one gets privacy.

        I did once use a UK bathroom in a supermarket where the lighting was all blue, which makes it hard to find a vein to inject. But the doors still closed properly.

        • orphiebaby@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          American here. I like your response and the one you responded to. Thanks for this insight. ^^

        • atomicorange@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m still not sure why there’s a regional difference, my guess is that it’s a quirk of history. We’re more used to it in the US, and there are benefits for the owners of the public toilets, so they don’t change.

          How did we get so used to it? I’m no toilet historian but it could be a (horrible, evil) company had a near monopoly on stall design during a formative part of our architectural history. Could just be the newness and utilitarianism of a lot of American architecture in general. We kind of sprung up overnight and so sometimes bad ideas got caught up in that wave of “progress” and became the norm due to being in the right place at the right time, and not really because they were good ideas or ideas that worked. Tipping culture, tax added at the till, and other weird Americanisms could all have similar root causes! Once you’ve gone down the route of something pro-business and anti-consumer, and gotten most people to accept it as normal, there’s no going back in a capitalist society.

    • blackbrook@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve seen this conversation many times on Reddit, and from what people say I assume there is a regional thing going on on. I’m from a part of the US where toilet stalls do not have massive gaps. There is a big gap at the bottom but too low for anyone to be seeing under unless they are crawling on the floor. Gaps along the sides are quite narrow. 1 cm at most, and nothing anyone is going to be seeing you through unless they are some kind of freak putting their eye right up to it. These stalls are prefab panels you can easily put into a room. The gaps mean ventilation for the room takes care the stalls too.

      I assume stalls started this way and became normalized, and in some parts of the country they’ve gotten sloppier, and sloppier, and normalized these huge gaps I hear people describe but never see.

      This might be my bias, but I assume these are the places where everything is a suburban stripmall wasteland, where there are no sidewalks, and where it seems to me the whole environment is increasingly dehumanized.

      • merridew@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Thank you for your comment. I can’t speak for the entire world, but in the UK a 1 cm" gap in the door of a public toilet would be massive and unacceptable. It’s not enough that someone can only see into a stall through a gap in the door if they are “right up to it”; they should not be able to see in at all. Public toilets in other countries have doors with gaps you can’t leer through at all.

        Re. the “gaps meaning ventilation”, surely the “big gap at the bottom” and the fact that the whole top is open will be contributing more to ventilation?

        You say you think this might be a regional thing in the US. Okay, could be. I have personally encountered this issue in Washington, California, North Carolina, DC, Massachusetts, Georgia, Texas, Oregon, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, Virginia, Pennsylvania and Maryland.

        • blackbrook@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I can understand that to someone not used to this, any gap at all might be troubling and one might tend to exaggerate it as “massive”.

          However note that these walls are fairly thick which narrows any visibility angles considerably. So to really see someone through the gap you would have to be at exactly the right angle and looking straight at them. Sitting on the toilet in one of these you can see some really narrow strip of the sinks area which also reflects the areas in which someone would have to be and looking straight at you to see you. People at the sink area have their back to you. People walking past them to another stall, are not looking to the side.

          I’m not trying to convince you that they are ideal, or that your should like them, just that when the gaps are pretty narrow it is not as big a deal as you might think to get used to.

          Again this is assuming these gaps are pretty narrow. I get the impression from what some Americans have said in other discussion that in some places they are quite a bit wider than I am used to, and what I said above may no longer apply.

          • merridew@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Oh, I absolutely believe that people in America can accept it’s “not as big a deal as you might think”.

            This is a thread about things about America that make no sense. So: I don’t understand why America, seemingly uniquely, accepts this as “not a big deal”.

            It’s weird. Land of the free, home of the public toilets strangers can see inside. So odd.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      1 year ago

      The US doesn’t have a VAT, but a sales tax on final sale of a good. Not only that, but states, counties, and cities can issue their own sales tax on sales within their borders. There are also cases where sales tax isn’t charged at the register. In the end, it is easier for companies to just charge the tax at the end, so they do.

      • Schmeckinger@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        1 year ago

        There are these mystical things called computers, that are very good at computing things. So when printing the price you can automatically compute it into the labels.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nowadays, yes. However, that wasn’t always the case. People got used to tax not being included and there has never been a big push to change that.

          • kaktus@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            22
            ·
            1 year ago

            So instead of calculating the price once and putting it on the sign, they calculate it every time a customer shows up at the register. Sure sounds way easier.

            • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Or they print out consistent signs across a region, advertise to it, and take care of the sales tax to handle it.

          • yata@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            13
            ·
            1 year ago

            Again, they calculated the price at the checkout, so they could also have done it for the price tag. It is not a valid excuse in the slightest. Its only purpose is to obfuscate the actual price of an item and confuse the customer about the actual price of an item.

      • yata@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        1 year ago

        That is a nonsensical excuse. If they can calculate the price at the checkout then they can calculate it when they are putting up the price tags.

        • DigitalFrank@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Many cities and counties often put a SPLOST (Special Purpose Local Option Tax) on the ballot. Usually for roads or schools, usually voted for, usually a penny. They are for a limited time, then they may expire or be put on the ballot again. If they expire, then every price tag for every item, in every store is now wrong. And if both city and county expire at different times, you could get a nightmare of changes.

          Easier to change the software at checkout for the changes rather than every price tag.

      • MJBrune@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not that it’s easier it’s that it allows the companies to gouge you. If the store said the bottle of coke was 2.15 instead of 1.99 you might realize that it’s not a good price for acidic sugar water and pick something else. Like the free water out of the faucet. This also means public water would be higher quality because people would actually use it and demand cleaner water.

  • WEAPONX@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    156
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Two party system. They can’t possibly represent everyone’s interests. Feels more like religion to me .

    • Treczoks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      More precisely: The reason for the two party system: FPTP voting. The Brits do the same shit, and have the same problems.

      The way it feels now (more cult-like than political and representing the populace) automatically and unavoidably stems from this FPTP issue. It automatically reduces the whole field to a reduced number of options, and while each reduction step takes longer than the last, this will ultimativley lead to a one-party state. It’s not a question of IF, it’s a question of WHEN and the REP program for 2025 to basically turn the government upside down to get unbeatable is trying to achieve this very single party state.

      • daddyjones@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        We do do the same and we do have the same problems, but it’s not so bad. We have at least 4 parties in parliament who have a voice and a number of others who are at least represented. It’s not good, but you have it worse

    • XEAL@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Two parties that are, if I’m not mistaken, the Right and the Rightest.

      Didn’t the USA see any leftist ideology as radical?

    • 4am@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      The two party system isn’t really codified in law, it’s just kind of a side-effect of the way we vote and the way government is organized. Due to those two things, it’s hard to change.

    • Captain Aggravated@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s an inevitable conclusion of our winner take all voting system. “The man with the most votes wins.” If 4 candidates run, and they get 22% 22% 16% and 40% of the vote, the man with 40% of the vote wins the race, and 60% of the population didn’t get the candidate they voted for.

      Now imagine you’ve got a red, orange, green and blue party. Orange voters get together and decide "You know, the Red party’s platform is pretty similar to ours, what if we didn’t run a candidate next time and instead encouraged our voters to vote for the Red candidate instead? The blue candidate won with 40% of the vote, but our two parties put together would have 44%.

      In the next election with three candidates, the red candidate wins 44% to 40%, prompting a similar conversation at the Green party headquarters. Soon enough there are two parties.

      We’re one of if not the oldest representative democracy in the world today; our constitution is 250 years old, there’s some old bugs still in the code base.

      • Shapillon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s like a restaurant with a single dish and you can only chose a side. One’s xenophobia with a sprinkle of batshit crazy, the other’s utter impotence.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Basically because we were early adopters to modern republic systems. We tried something new because parliament was a bit too kingy for our tastes. But due to its simplicity it became really easy for two parties to wipe the floor with everyone else. And basically the only times they’ve changed was at the start and again shortly before our civil war. Neither party has ever had good reason to change the system, which would require massive agreement to change our constitution. So nobody does.

      For example, politically I’m a syndicalist, but the democrats are pro union, pro environment, pro woman, and pro lgbt, all of which with a big asterisk but still I consistently vote for them because the greens didn’t win with Nader so they’re definitely going to lose now. So I dutifully vote Democrat because the only other party that has a chance is the republicans and they hate me and everything I believe in.

      If we could do it again we’d do it better but in our defense we didn’t really have anyone to model off of

  • glad_cat@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    105
    ·
    1 year ago

    At-will employment makes no sense to me. You go to work every day knowing you could be fired without any possibility of taking the time to find another job. It would drive me crazy.

    • NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      You should not compare that to employment as it is known in other countries.

      Rather compare it to slavery. Doesn’t it look better now? ;-)

        • GregoryTheGreat@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I quit by showing up 3 hours early and sent an eff you I’m out email. Dropped my badge on my desk and walked out without talking to anyone.

        • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No. You just tell someone above you that you quit, and then leave.

          You could walk out without telling anyone, but that’s rare. Depends on how shitty the job is.

        • ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nope. I literally walked into work, dropped off my badge, said I quit and never looked back. HR called and I let it go to voicemail. They wanted to confirm my mailing address. A few weeks later I got my last paycheck. I left that company to change fields and it has never come up as an issue in subsequent roles. Quitting without notice is a fantastic perk that almost no one will be able to use. The key is to burn out early so looking for the next job is just around the corner.

          • Draghetta@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m sorry I don’t get why this is a perk.

            In here we have mandatory notice up to three months depending on tenure. It’s perfectly normal for new employers to have to wait the notice period when hiring a new person. Mind you, that’s 3 more guaranteed pay checks after you quit.

            If you want to leave early you can negotiate a shorter notice, which i personally have never seen refused - normally people don’t want to keep leavers around so they’ll agree to a couple of weeks for handovers and then happily send you away with your (mandatory, tenure based) severance bonus.

            If your old employer is petty and wants to keep you around for the whole notice you can just stop caring and carry on with the bare minimum. What are they going to do, fire you? Unless you’re causing them serious damage in that time they can’t do anything about it. That is also why employers tend to be very happy when you try to negotiate a short notice period.

            I can understand how satisfying it must be to show up, slam your badge on somebody’s desk and say “fuck you I quit” - but other than those two seconds of joy I don’t see any other benefits.

            • WarmSoda@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              There’s no negotiating anything with at will employment. You just leave if you want to leave.

              You can negotiate if you want to. Or you can say fuck off and just get another job somewhere else. That’s the freedom of it. You’re not locked into any type of contact.

              • Draghetta@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yeah but I don’t understand how that’s better. Your employer has to agree to keep you around longer rather than the other way around, feels much worse for financial well-being. But even if it was the same, there’s no way that’s worth having zero notice firing without just cause.

                It feels a bit like cope ngl- like yeah I’m doing chemo I can’t eat anything but flavourless meal replacements but look I’ve never been slimmer! That’s a remarkable perk!

        • JPAKx4@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Depending on your contract, you can absolutely just leave mid shift with no repercussions. Even if you breach your contract, the company will have to pursue legal action to claim any damages, which is costly.

    • Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I guess that also makes it somewhat easier to get hired though? You can give your employees a chance without thinking too much about it, and if they suck just fire them.

      • Turun@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        We have this in Germany - for the first six months of employment. Ok, it’s still two weeks notice because that’s the right thing to do, but still, it’s less than the 1/2/3/4/5/6/7 months of notice required after working at a place for 0.5/5/8/10/12/15/20 years. (BGB §622 for the curious)

        There is no reason to keep the possibility for such a short notice indefinitely.

    • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the most part, in my experience, don’t be a fuck up and you won’t get fired. Every company I’ve ever worked for has had very strict rules about firing people, It can take months for someone to get fired for anything short of violence, theft, or sexual harassment.

  • Aceticon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    They will say of themselves as being Irish/Italian/other-european-nationality because their great-grandfather or great-grandmother came from there.

  • NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    88
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    A “politics” channel on a site called Lemmy.World that is specifically only for US politics, because America is the world.

  • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    City design and suburbs. Like if I had to drive 40 minutes to get groceries I would prefer to starve and those suburbs look like death would be the better alternative. Also driving to go for a walk, wtf?

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Vote for people who actively oppose universal healthcare, mandatory PTO policies, universal family leave policies, universal college-level education, etc.

  • Michal@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    74
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    City zoning.

    Oh, i have to drive from single family zone to commercial district to pick up a loaf of bread. Then drive to education district to drop kids at kindergarten, and finally to business district to work. At the end of the day i hang out at bar/entertainment district with the guys from work to have a beer, but there’s no public transport so I have to drink alcohol free so I can drive back home. That’s only 120 miles in a day!

  • jon@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    69
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The way politicians and the political system nakedly serves the needs and interests of corporations and the wealthy, and not the average individual.

    The way that the price you’re quoted invariably gets bumped up by various taxes.

    The insane system that is tipping, including the fact that a lot of workers are so underpaid that they rely on tips to get by.

    The incessant adverts on TV for medical products, particularly prescription drugs.

  • Knusper@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    1 year ago

    Voting registration. I get a letter that I can vote and what the options are. Then on voting day, which is on a Sunday, because why would it be on any other day, I just walk into my town hall with that letter and my ID card, put down my crosses and leave. It’s like a walk in the park, often quite literally.

  • Pandoras_Can_Opener@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Healthcare, electoral college, how supreme court justices are elected, first past the post voting system.

    Edit: and the self assurance to nitpick a foreigner over the details of how justices come into their job.

    • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The EC is a mechanism to make the Presidential election less democratic.

      Supreme Court Justices aren’t elected at all. The President nominates a judge and the Senate votes to approve that person for the post.

      FTtP voting is bad. It’s just awful. The more you understand it the clearer that becomes.

      Healthcare… no cap, we don’t understand it, either. It’s a mess.

      • spacecowboy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        What’s not to understand about your healthcare? It’s the one thing you literally cannot live without. Make the barrier to it $$$ (and tie it to your employment) means you’ll always have a subdued work force, and a big money funnel for the wealthy.

        • ℕ𝕖𝕞𝕠@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s only the start and even then not quite accurate. I don’t have insurance through my employer, for example: I used to have it through the government and now I have private, and before either I just bought healthcare with cash on the barrelhead.

          And the thing is, paying cash is usually less than half of the price charged to insurers, even if you set up a payment plan, because individuals are easier to get to pay than the insurance corporations. And there’s ab additional discount for paying day-of-service because then they don’t even need to send a bill and they know they’ll actually get paid! So it can be a lot cheaper to buy healthcare in cash, depending on how much you need.

          But now let’s say you have government insurance: Very good on preventative care, pediatrics, prenatal. Everything generally performed in-house and same-day, but scheduling is a crapshoot. Still the simplest insurance option once you have it.

          Employer-provided insurance: My ex-employer, two jobs and half a decade ago, is still fighting with their insurance provider at the time about a hospital visit I had back then. Insurance says it wasn’t withing coverage dates, HR can prove otherwise.

          Private insurance (but also employer insurance): Actual healthcare providers don’t know and don’t care if services are within network; which can change on a whim anyway, so someone who was in network when you schedule an appointment might be out-of-network three months later when you finally get in there. Since you can’t just schedule with a specialist without a referral, it takes at least two months and two appointments to see one, often more like six months, and whether or not your insurance will pay for it is up in the air anyway. And you’re paying hundreds of dollars each month for this “service”. It’s insane.

          And this is for a young family in relatively good health seeking preventative care. I can’t even image this nightmare of corporatism and bureaucracy with a chronic condition or an emergency.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.club
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Electoral College exists because it was never the intent for the President to be elected by the public. It sticks around because changing it requires changing the Constitution, and a majority of states benefit from the status quo.