And the military shouldn't be engaged in occupying American cities. But both those ships have sailed, hospitals have already announced they will be closing as the budget cuts come into effect, now it's a matter of which hospitals stay open.
And the military shouldn't be engaged in occupying American cities. But both those ships have sailed, hospitals have already announced they will be closing as the budget cuts come into effect, now it's a matter of which hospitals stay open.
I don't see anyone on my Bluesky feed saying "well DC deserves to have a military occupation", but I have seen a lot of people (including OP) on here saying "well rural areas deserve to have no hospitals." There's a very clear us-vs-them groupthink going on here.
No one deserves it, it's simply the reality we live in. Your anger should be with the people who voted to cause this, not people trying to minimize the impact by stretching funds as best they can.
I am not angry that the people trying to minimize the impact. I am angry at the people saying openly that large swathes of the US (including, notably, all children and undocumented people) should go without healthcare because 51% of their state's voting population made a stupid decision.
Will go* not should. We just cut a trillion dollars from the health care budget, people *are* going to suffer, it's too late to avoid that one.
OP is very clearly saying *should* because that's how those areas voted, and has decided to disregard any pushback as "the stupid part of Bluesky."
They just said that people should get the policies they vote for, you're the one pretending that means everyone who suffers as a result deserves it. And yeah, people should get what they vote for, protecting the electorate from the worst of the GOP is why they dismiss what they say as just words.
No one but the people who voted that way deserve it, and I'd still rather they have public service than not. But we lost that fight, massive cuts did happen, and it's going to hurt rural voters more than urban. It's a bummer, but I'm not going to support cutting hospitals in my city, they can drive.
You did the thing. You made something up, using words I didn’t say, something that directly goes against the words in the short three-post thread I wrote, then argued against the comment you made up. I don’t think another example of that was necessary, but thanks for providing one, I guess.
Your words were "respect that voters are adults who make choices", and I asked how does that make sense when other people use hospitals in those communities than "voters who are adults." Your own words do not make a coherent statement.
The voters, who are adults, have a responsibility to the other people in their communities who use hospitals. Those adult voters abandoned that responsibility, and now their communities will face the consequences of those choices. Why should my community bear the burden of their choices instead?
Why should we give hospital beds to someone injured while drunk driving? Why should we have summer school for kids who flunked classes? Why should alleged killers have public defenders? You help people as much as you can, even if you don't think they deserve it, because its the right thing to do.
At a certain point, it becomes nigh on suicidal to prioritize the well-being of communities whose populations overwhelmingly want me and mine to suffer over our own. We’re well past that point.
Where do you see the word "deserve," or a synonym of it?
"Why is the answer never to respect that voters are adults who make choices" is deserving/retribution/victim blaming. There was no referendum in 2024 that said "do you want fewer hospitals?" and it was not a common talking point in the election at all.
They ran on cutting Medicaid and there were endless stories about how precarious rural healthcare systems were. I'd rather cut no funding, but there's a trillion dollar hole now. What communities would you rather have eat the cuts?