Try the political quiz

Which political party do you most identify with?

Socialist

Conversation thread

The following is a 3 message exchange between 4 users

+
Expand

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2yrs2Y

How would your daily life change if healthcare was free for everyone?

 @9TNCKD6 from Alaska  answered…2yrs2Y

I would feel no need to work for my healthcare if it was all the same though I believe there should be a base basic healthcare for all with purchasable healthcare options above that

 @9VK759QWorkers from Nevada  commented…2yrs2Y

You shouldn't feed the need to work for health care in the first place. If the government really wanted a thriving society, they would provide free treatment for all. In fact, studies have shown that access to healthcare boosts productivity in the work place. I've seen way too many hard working Americans have their life flipped upside due to unforeseen medical issues. I also believe a higher income shouldn't be what constitutes the ability to quality care. Some of the most labor intensive & mentally taxing jobs pay the least. I don't think someone's pay grade should determine their worthiness to quality care.

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies