I am not American or a doctor, so I can’t really comment intelligently on these question (which are very good questions). I can only pass on what I see clearly in my own profession’s reporting (mortality rates in retirement are much lower for people with more money, the spread in mortality outcomes among income/wealth bands has been increasing for decades, much of the improvement in morality rates in the last few decades is attributed to improved outcomes for people with cancer) and what health care technocrats tell me (access to healthcare in retirement increases with weath). These observations paint a picture, but you could dedicate your working life to studying longevity outcomes and never full understand everything.
All of this stuff is compatible with my thesis. Because of their better access to health care (among other things) when they are younger, richer people will probably be healthier when they become old and all of the above are readily explained.
This one I think is probably also true, but at least in the US, I think the effect of this factor is less. Even patients on Medicare have out of pocket expenses related to health care which the wealthy remain unconcerned about. Also just accessing it can be a problem. If you are old and infirm, and you don’t have Jeeves to chauffeur to your doctor’s appointments, even the logistics are a sweat.
Nevertheless, the presence of Medicare massively narrows the gap between the rich and not rich.
Yep, those are all reasonable points and I don’t doubt them. I am certainly not arguing against the efficacy and social value of Medicare.
I’m just relieved Trump won’t take it away, and is slamming RDS for considering making CHANGES to it.
4 Likes
This is worth reading, pretty convincing takedown.
3 Likes
Stiking down another gerrymander on racial discrimination grounds (similar to the recent case from Alabama). Dems might pick up a seat in Louisiana.
3 Likes
It’s good, but raises the question why they initially froze the order and cost D’s a seat in 2022 election.
You’re never gonna go wrong with the reasoning being: “because fuck you that’s why”.
3 Likes
Shit I forgot about this one. Our disgraceful SC has this case coming up that could prevent a wealth tax.
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed published in 2021, two of the Moores’ lawyers also declared unambiguously that the lawsuit “stands to slam shut the door on a federal wealth tax like the one Sen. Elizabeth Warren wants to enact.” They made a direct pitch to “the courts” to hear the Moores’ case “now” to make it easier to block a wealth tax in the future.
“If the courts confirm the Sixteenth Amendment’s limited reach now, that would relieve them from having to do so in a politically explosive case directly challenging a wealth tax,” the two lawyers concluded. “The courts would do well to remind Congress at this opportune time that its taxing power is not without limits.”
Says they could hear it in the fall term. Has anything been happening that makes people think some SC justices might have been influenced by wealthy people who oppose such wealth taxes?
5 Likes
That’s basically Gorsuch’s philosophy towards whoever is opposing Indian issues.
Has it ever been explained why Gorsuch has that particular soft spot? My understanding is that he has pretty much always been that way. I’m curious why.
3 Likes
Dissenting: You Will Never Guess!
1 Like
Alito and Thomas obviously dissent, but so does Gorsuch. I guess it could have been worse than 6-3. Kavanaugh has a concurring opinion that doesn’t add much (he agrees in full with the majority opinion). But it does suggest that he’s looking for some standard in future cases where federal courts might/might not review a state court’s interpretation of state law, and that the Rehnquist standard from Bush v. Gore is the appropriate one.
This might be the most important win in decades. The ramifications of a lose here were catastrophic.
1 Like
Maintaining the status quo is not a win, and the fact that 3 justices are fully on board with legislative Calvinball is a terrible sign of things to come.
1 Like
Yeah didnt know this was being decided today but thats a major outcome to the good for once
I’m a little disappointed tbh. I was going to change my name to “legislature thereof”, move to Texas, and really shake things up.
3 Likes