722
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

Turns out someone who looks like Luigi but is definitely not Luigi proved it takes only one death certificate to initiate change for scores of people

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

But nothing changed... Can you show a change in healthcare since? have acceptance rates gone up? premiums gone down?

Nothing changed.

Edit: Bunch of downvotes... but nobody can tell me anything that's changed... interesting isn't it?

[-] FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Apart from all the claims that were suddenly approved or execs of other companies suddenly removing all personal info from websites?

Fear. Nothing meaningful will change until the rich fear for their lives, and we saw just how much they’re scrambling after 1 CEO.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -3 points 1 year ago

Apart from all the claims that were suddenly approved

Source this please... To date, I still see United Healthcare at dead bottom. And rate fluctuating only nominally over the past 12 months.

execs of other companies suddenly removing all personal info from websites?

If you're counting this as a meaningful change to healthcare... Then I guess you found one that I can't contest. Congrats!

Fear. Nothing meaningful will change until the rich fear for their lives, and we saw just how much they’re scrambling after 1 CEO.

No, this is my point. Even with "fear" nothing changed.

[-] Grapho@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

They need to fear more, clearly.

Y'all tried tens of thousands of protests but are giving up at one CEO? That's a shitty sample size.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago

Y'all

Speak for yourself please.

[-] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Several health insurers reversed some of their latest shitty policies within days of the event. Like the one that would put a time limit in the anesthesia they'd pay for. That's an immediate course change from hundred billion dollar companies.

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 0 points 1 year ago

Like the one that would put a time limit in the anesthesia they’d pay for.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/mollybohannon/2024/12/06/anthem-blue-cross-blue-shield-reverses-planned-anesthesia-time-limits-after-intense-pushback/

Elected officials in Connecticut and New York both said they stepped in Thursday to intervene with Anthem’s new plan before the company announced the reversal. New York Gov. Kathy Hochul said on X, formerly known as Twitter, the change was "outrageous" and she would “make sure New Yorkers are protected.” Connecticut’s comptroller Sean Scanlon said his office had already reached out to Anthem and the policy would “no longer be going into effect here in Connecticut.” Scanlon shared that update hours before Anthem announced the reversal.

[-] Grapho@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Well that's settled then, politicians would never lie to provide cover for companies. Nothing else that happened that week could have explained it, the government has done this so often (without even announcing it to the people they want votes from) that this is for sure the only explanation.

[-] ExtantHuman@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

So a could politicians managed to block it in just their states, but the company reversed it for everyone... And you think that somehow refutes what I said?

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes... Anthem is a subsidiary of BCBS that operates geographically and doesn't compete with other BCBS subsidiary...

So literally yes. If they were blocked in their few geo locations... Literally yes.

Edit: They service 8 states. When your biggest state says "fuck no" to your new policy... you reevaluate or roll-back (or go to lawsuit).

this post was submitted on 15 Jun 2025
722 points (99.5% liked)

politics

31197 readers
2156 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles. Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to US politics and contain quality and original content. Social Media adjacent hosts like Substack are allowed, but ONLY if they tie back to a company/subsidiary. No personal or friend group blogs and no self-promotion. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and re-hosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing other users of being bots or paid actors.
  3. No memes, trolling, misinformation, or low-effort posts/comments (including reposts). If you see posts like this that anger you, do not engage. Report, block, and live a happier life than they do. Any slap-fight is subject to comment removals. Fights full of rule violations will result in temporary bans to cool off.
  4. No manipulating votes via bots or alt accounts; this will result in permanent bans. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in an account ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be permanently banned.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules and use critical thinking when reading, posting, and commenting. Users that repeatedly have comments or posts removed, weaponize reports, or violate the code of conduct, will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users. The reason(s) behind moderator action(s) are publicly available through the Modlog.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News

• World News

• Business News

• Political Discussion

• Ask Politics

• Military News

• Global Politics

• Moderate Politics

• Progressive Politics

• UK Politics

• Canadian Politics

• Australian Politics

• New Zealand Politics

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS