11235853211

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   You've made my point. It may not incur a personal cost at the time of use, but it incurs a cost regardless. I have no problem understanding, I am the subject of the article. I have medical debt, and I would prefer a public healthcare s
2. 2.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   It's not extremist nor lunacy if your people are being killed and your own backyard is being poisoned. It is standing up for your rights as a human being. Revolution has time and time again been the way our societies evolve. If the Ame
3. 3.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   Direct this rage in a productive manner. There is environmental progress in reform, but it will not change the core power dynamic. The police kill and enslave with impunity, corporations will destroy the lands and waters we rely on for food
4. 4.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   Right, just pointing out that the media often uses the term "free" when referring to public programs that workers pay for with their tax dollars. It is deceptive.
5. 5.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   And how "free" is it when we pay the taxes for it? Public healthcare is a term that is less likely to trigger red flags, pun intended, in the minds of conservatives who react to "free" or "socialized".
6. 6.▲
   by 11235853211 7y ago

   Here in the USA, slavery is still legal under case of incarceration. In Florida, Texas, and Louisianna, prisoners are forced to work without pay. In other states, you are charged "prison rent" that is magnitudes higher than you co