It's not even a competent textbox. Try to scan barcodes into it for example, or use it with Autohotkey. It has some sort of buffering issue and lags horribly whenever characters are input faster than a human.
It's a similar phenomenon to day cares dealing with late pickups. They have a few chronically late parents, so they institute a late pickup fee. Parents who always picked their kids up on time because of the implicit agreement now have an explicit agreement that it's okay to pick them up late if they pay a bit more. So the incidences of late pickups actually increased at the day care. You're exchanging a trust based system for financial interactions and some people have very different motivations.
It's not an uncommon reaction. There's lots of things that people are on average perfectly willing to do for free but are not willing to do for a pittance sum.
Very common and widespread in the UK across all social classes. It is done purely altruistically (you will save a life) and the NHS makes life easier by providing pop-up donation clinics in shopping centres and works car parks.
In the US, people are paid to donate blood (!). This makes the whole transaction feel scummy and is, unsurprisingly, something many people avoid doing leaving only the poor to donate for money.
I agree, but there are some advantages to donating blood regularly. It's a free blood-iron check, they also screen for various diseases and it's probably the most effective way of reducing microplastics in your blood. Also, there's the chance that you might need a blood transfusion yourself, so while you won't be getting your donation back, it means that there's more chance that your blood type will be available if you donate.
Popup blood donation sites are pretty common in the US, too, though run by orgs like the Red Cross. I've done it a few times, there's no payment involved besides some free snacks + drinks.
The mindset makes sense if you see his as an implicit service. The equivalent is if there was a dedicated cart collector every 2-3 spaces and you pay them $1 to return your cart. Now you're paying for a service.
It's like littering in a park vs not throwing your trash in the bin at a fast food restaurant. One is more of a commons that everyone has responsibility to clean up. The other is a private establishment who will clean up after guests if they don't. I'd rather just be clean regardless but I see the perspective.
Ackshually there is part of the first amendment that applies to certain people, specifically the right for "the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The courts have prior held that non-immigrant visas and illegal immigrants usually aren't "the people" referenced by the constitution, which is why they have no right to bear arms which also uses "the people" in reference to the people with that right. If they don't have the right to bear arms, it follows they are not "the people" and thus have no implicit protection to parts of the first amendment that explicitly assign protection to "the people."
It may be up for interpretation whether the immigrants in question were petitioning the government for grievances, if so that may have not been protected if they are not people.
> I still don't get what you think is "newsworthy", or what "should" be reported on.
That people die from heart disease and cancer, especially when they get older, is common knowledge. That's what makes it less newsworthy versus a local homicide story that is not common knowledge.
That there is some amount of local homicide is common knowledge. See, I can do it too :)
The question about "what should be reported on more" is really about "which thing is worth spending more resources / attention / publicity" on, and I personally would put that towards a preventable disease that far too many people are dying of.
I've heard stories of plastic bags on the highway making their way into the path of the front-facing cameras of vehicles. Resulting in automatic emergency braking at highway speeds.
No, I was quite serious. I like carrying my laptop to/from places in an inconspicuous bag. I used to use random bags and found these movie prop bags to be ideal.
I almost want to disagree with you here but I’m not fully apprised of the greater situation.
My dad is poor and neglectful of himself. He had a stroke. He got ambulanced to the emergency room and spent a good deal of time there.
The hospital discussed billing which was several hundreds of thousands of dollars. Well he can’t afford that. The hospital had us talk to some advisers and they got him on a state Medicaid (?) plan. The plan retroactively paid for it all.
He then got checked out for a variety of other issues including a severe spinal issue and a hip replacement for 0 out of pocket.
It’s great. He’s a changed man who is active and takes care of himself now.
I also had a major medical event and I have since paid tens of thousands out of pocket after insurance. At one point we were investigating if I could essentially quit work for a bit, go on the Medicaid plan, get better, and then go back to my job. That is madness!
States that opted into the ACA Medicaid Expansion and generally fund hospitals have great emergency care for poor people. There's a kind of missing middle where once you're above the income threshold for Medicaid but aren't working for a job that's willing to fund an extremely good health plan you have to deal with all sorts of deductibles and prior authorizations and stuff. Plus, non-emergency care, especially from specialists, has gotten longer and longer wait times unless you're lucky enough to live in a region with mostly healthy people that also aren't the "worried well."
Tl;dr, it's incredibly patchwork, and everyone's experience is going to vary depending on their state's individual social safety net, the overall health of their local population, the particular insurance network and hospital network they have access to, and their individual income.
Also, the US has a federal law that no hospital that accepts Medicare patients is allowed to deny care in the case of an emergency based on someone's ability to pay. That means that a lot of very poor people will get incredibly expensive emergency care for free, while not being able to afford the basic preventative care that would keep them out of a state of medical emergency. That isn't really the hallmark of a particularly functional system.
You have rights in an emergency room under EMTALA
Doctor talking to a patient
You have these protections:
1. An appropriate medical screening exam to check for an emergency medical condition, and if you have one,
2. Treatment until your emergency medical condition is stabilized, or
3. An appropriate transfer to another hospital if you need it
The law that gives everyone in the U.S. these protections is the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, also known as "EMTALA." This law helps prevent any hospital emergency department that receives Medicare funds (which includes most U.S. hospitals) from refusing to treat patients.
