For the sake of continuing the discussion, I believe there are a few points of contention that have come to a head with this title specifically.
1. Console gamers != PC gamers, or Consolitis wrecks a series. 2. Open wounds from the games journalism debacle 3. Resentment from EA's business practices, like Battlefield 1943 not getting a PC port or the Wilson Loot Box) 4. False hope the series was getting back to its roots with its return to WWII.
Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, Battlefield 2142 were all released from 2002 - 2006. This was the tail end of the PC as a separate platform. Prior to 2004, consoles were for arcade ports, games with a Japanese aesthetic, and party games (multiplayer games where all the players were in the same room). PC games leaned more toward the simulation side, hopefully balancing that out with fun game play. Racing sims, space sims, business sims, city sims, sims sims, etc etc etc. The first four entries in the Battlefield series gave us a game that was a happy medium between crazy fast arcade FPS Unreal Tournament and a much more serious sim such as ARMA. Yes, far from a hardcore sim, but it was a balance and a balance that worked.
After 2004, PC games became ports of console games. PC gamers put up with it to an extent as long as they could still have PC things, like modding or running your own server. Then that was taken away and they got micro transactions, the Wilson Loot Box, and unfinished buggy games instead. At this point the main stream games industry, which EA is a major player in, no longer cared about games, and only about the extraction of wealth they believed they were entitled to.
The PC games industry has started to change in the last couple years. Elite Dangerous and others has revitalized the space sim which has been dead since the early oughts. Codemasters gave the fans Dirt Rally, which is much closer to Richard Burns Rally than the joke that was Dirt 3.
With the return of the Battlefield franchise to WWII, the PC gamers was hopeful the game would go back to it's roots back into that sweet spot between Unreal Tournament and ARMA. The Wilson loot box would hopefully be out after threat of government regulation. However the title being Battlefield V and not something like Battlefield 1942:2 gave foresight into the truth.
Male gamers play as female characters in RPGs and the like all of the time. There are quite a few games where a female is the primary protaganist in the game. You don't hear about an outrage with female characters in Overwatch or Fortnite. Normies don't care. What happened was DICE revealed the cyborg woman in a WW2 setting, and PC gamers realized they weren't going to get the game they were hoping for, and complained.
Nathan Grayson, of course, let all the SJWs know about the so sad sexist gamers complaining about there being women in the game in the most condescending way possible, and Mr. Grayson reignited Gamergate. EA/DICE went along with that narrative to cover up the fact they were releasing an unfinished game that their customers didn't want.
The authoritarian intersectionalist mob attacked the complainers and anyone who could understand their point of view, regardless if they agreed with it or not. They came out and called everyone gamerphobe slurs and accused them of sexism, racism, and ableism. The Gamergate wounds tore right open and EA/DICE agreed with the mob and told the gamers not to buy the game.
Yep. The real problem is the identity politics currently being pushed hard by progressives. Identity politics creates the toxic tribalism which the aggressors such as those evil Russians are able to manipulate to further divide us. Identity politics is the problem, the ability to manipulate Americans to further divide us is the symptom of the problem.
Them using their platforms to gather and sell data on users gives those who would manipulate us everything they need to successfully manipulate and divide us.
Internally, these platforms follow and believe in the identity politics being pushed by the progressives. This taints any action they do to counter the symptomof public manipulation into an action whose outcome will only serve to make it worse. Never mind profit motivates them to intensify the problem, or do nothing about it at best.
They are becoming the corporate equivalent of the Evergreen College. The investors should be calling for Pichai's head. The employees in non-leadership positions should not be dictating the company's direction by mob rule.
This is just ridiculous. I could be off base in your friends case. If I am,I apologize, but I will give you my perspective from the point of view of the pharmacy.
If your friend is not working due to medical reasons, he more than qualifies for medicaid. Since we are talking about medicaid coverage, this is a glimpse of what single payer would look like in the US. The state has determined what a sufficient amount of insulin use should be, therefore how much insulin they are going to pay for over a given period. It sounds like he is running afoul of this either in terms of blood testing supplies or the insulin itsself.
In the state of Washington, Medicare's guidelines are much more strict than the state's medicaid guidelines. Getting placed in medicare can be very disastrous short term for patients as now they are limited in brand of supplies and amount. They may have had dosing working in one brand, but the switch in brand is off enough where there has to be more experimentation, thus testing, to get it right. Then you find you can't get any more testing supplies for 2 more weeks unless you pay out of pocket.
As far as fighting with the state to get more supplies/insulin: The only time the state's guidelines has been insufficient is in two cases:
1.The patient's diet does not meet the restrictions of their disease. I am talking about patients who buy 10 pounds of candy with their $3,000 worth of insulin every 2 weeks.
2. Older people. They aren't quite as sharp and technical as they used to be and have to retest more often due to mistakes or lapse in memory.
The real problem is the cost of the supplies and insulin itself. Mandated insurance / insurance coverage is detrimental to fixing this problem. As college tuition has skyrocketed due ease of access to student loans and government involvement, so has the cost of medication. The only medication that has decreased in price in my time in pharmacy are medications that are not usually covered by insurance. IE Viagra.
Many medications that were in the $5 - $10 range skyrocketed over $100 after Obamacare came into effect. This is mostly hidden from view because all people pay are copays, or nothing at all at pick up. The economics behind the counter are shielded from the general public. When insurance companies raise premiums or copays to cover this cost increase, everyone gets mad at the insurance companies and not at the drug manufacturers fleecing the entire system.
I will say that medicaid is paying the pharmacy $10 for insulin that costs us $80 to get from the wholesaler. We don't get paid to help your friend fight to get this stuff covered, which we do anyway. We lose money dispensing his medication to him. And when he is out and its not covered, chances are a pharmacist gave him a vial under the table. Keep this in mind when you see long lines at the pharmacy counter or it takes a bit longer than expected to get pick up your meds.
You might break it up into the social media part and then data analysis/advertising part.
Regulate via sound privacy law (one can dream) so the advertising spin off does not have total and complete access to the social media data and the social media part can sell this data to anyone within the regulatory framework.
The sound privacy law is the most important part followed by encouraging competition with what do to with the shareable data and where we want to go as a society with targeted ads.
I have the same thing happen to me a lot, only with Amazon instead of Facebook. For a recent example, I do the cooking in the household and enjoy doing so. I believe I was letting youtube run on its own in the background, and eventually it played some video on how to do sous-vide at home. I didn't know what sous-vide was so I did a some research on the technique on my iphone while it was running.
That was the full extent of it, a video played on my workstation, some wikipedia research on my iphone.
Despite using privacy badger and ublock origin, my apple id email is not the same as the email I use for google services, nor the same I use for amazon, no amazon app installed on the iphone, not being signed in to any website including youtube, wikipedia and amazon, the next morning Amazon sent me an email offering deal information on sous-vide cooking tools and supplies.
Am a little desensitized to it, but it still freaks me out a little every time this happens.
when everything here is a voluntary interaction and anybody who doesn't like it can stop playing.
Unfortunately, that is not true. Loot boxes were designed to create positive reinforcement that a certain percentage of the population gets addicted to and can't just stop. Loot boxes are slot machines. You put in real money for that 1 in 100,000+ chance of a jackpot. They use flashing lights, streamers, music to create that positive reinforcemt just like the slot machine. They dangle a few free ones in front of you hoping to grab you in so you put down some real cash. They hope to cash in on the Gambler's Fallacy and grab more cash from you. For some, this will become a compulsive behavior they won't be able to stop.
If, say, 1 out of 100,000 Kinder Surprise eggs had a toy worth quite a bit more than what was paid for the Kinder Surprise, then its gambling. If the Kinder Surprise shoots out stars and streamers every time they open, with greater fanfare depending on rarity of item, then they are using psychological manipulation to get you to buy more. If they give out a few Kinder Surprises marketed heavily to children to get them addicted to the positive feedback loop and giving false hopes that the 1 in 100,000 prize will be in the next egg purchased... they deserve the ban hammer of the law.
I am more curious in what will happen to collectible card games.
How about open sourcing the Midi Manager so we can run that on Windows 10. I like my old games with MIDI music to use my hardware, not your awful software implementation.
I learned after watching Cooked that traditional aboriginal farming involves burning the grasslands and picking up the precooked critters. Climatologists blame the technique for all sorts of nastiness.
However, after reading some of the inconsistencies in the brief wikipedia article, I have to wonder if the aboriginals learned the technique from the birds.
That's what I'm wondering... could this be used to wrap Mars in a protective space blanket to protect its atmosphere from solar wind? If so, that's a pretty huge step in teraforming.
That's what I get for not reading the story. I thought the gold was disappearing into blizzards black hole, and you got an item that had no other link back to WoW.
Ah, yes. Just like copyright law, the laws governing corporations are an abomination and perversion of what was originally intended. In the beginning:
Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.
What the hell happened? Corporations made TONS of money off of the Civil War (Military-Industrial Complex?). Corporations bought influence and successfully eroded the protections given to the people by the founders and the states from such corporations as the East India Company.
Yes, I know we like to ridicule the founders as not being worthy of the pedestal they've been placed on. But they got a lot of things right that got royally screwed up over time. Corporations were not intended to be given power with the singular purpose of making money. They were intended to be given power to fulfill a purpose, and then dissolve when the purpose was fulfilled, or no longer necessary. The corporation would cease to exist if it violated any laws, and the people running the corporation would be held accountable for those actions. Almost sounds like a utopia.
You have all rights. The Bill of Rights lists the rights Congress is explicitly never to infringe upon.
"The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is called, in The City of New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 139, the "powers which relate to merely municipal legislation, or what was, perhaps, more properly called internal police," "not surrendered or restrained" by the Constitution of the United States."
I've seen the patent for this prior to this release. I was pretty confident it was disinformation so competitors wouldn't know what they were actually doing. I still believe that's case, and what this protype is.
It may have been George Lucas style revisionism, but it's been said the iPhone was a stepping stone to get to Jobs' goal of the iPad. The click wheel wouldn't fly. And I doubt AT&T would have redesigned their network and voicemail system for this either.
Jobs had a vision. For him Apple was not just a spreadsheet of metrics with which to extract the most amount of wealth from and then leave.
Jobs genuinely wanted to change the world with technology while also making a living at it. Was he a douche? Sure. Was he a manipulative son of a bitch? Perhaps. But he knew what he wanted to do and he seeked out the talent to make that happen.
Apple without a visionary is not Apple. Tim Cook and Jony Ives are not visionaries. I am without a doubt sure that the were the best people for the jobs they did while Jobs was there, however with out the direction/management that Jobs brought to the table, Apple is just adrift.
That spark Jobs, Gates, Hewlet, Packard, all the former great tech founders had is gone and have been replaced with out of sync number crunchers only interested in cost cutting and maximizing profit.
You could be right. To me it sounds like both the battery design was too aggressive for current technology as well as the space allowed for the battery to do its thing was insufficient. If they replaced the battery, it would have to be less aggressive, lower capacity design plus a reduction in the battery's physical size.
The resulting battery may have been insufficient for the phone in a way that was unacceptable to the marketing guys. If the phone only has 1 to 2 hours of power with the fix, the hit to the brand may have been calculated to be too great than just doing a recall and going back to the drawing board.
Which circles back to can you censor ideas you don't agree with on your platform? If you say the cake maker has to serve people he doesn't like, then the cake maker must also put tweets on his cake even if he doesn't agree with it.
Availability or the number of people who have insurance has no validity as a metric on quality or affordability of healthcare.
Insurance is the problem with healthcare in America. Forcing people to buy the problem isn't going to fix healthcare. Subsidies on the problem isn't going to fix healthcare. Just because you are paying for the problem doesn't mean you are entitled to or receive any better healthcare than anyone else.
Paying for the problem doesn't make healthcare cheaper, it makes it more expensive. The problem with healthcare makes it more expensive for people who don't pay for the problem.
We either need to go full on single payer or complete remove health insurance all together.
Slashdot Mirror
For the sake of continuing the discussion, I believe there are a few points of contention that have come to a head with this title specifically.
1. Console gamers != PC gamers, or Consolitis wrecks a series.
2. Open wounds from the games journalism debacle
3. Resentment from EA's business practices, like Battlefield 1943 not getting a PC port or the Wilson Loot Box)
4. False hope the series was getting back to its roots with its return to WWII.
Battlefield 1942, Battlefield Vietnam, Battlefield 2, Battlefield 2142 were all released from 2002 - 2006. This was the tail end of the PC as a separate platform. Prior to 2004, consoles were for arcade ports, games with a Japanese aesthetic, and party games (multiplayer games where all the players were in the same room). PC games leaned more toward the simulation side, hopefully balancing that out with fun game play. Racing sims, space sims, business sims, city sims, sims sims, etc etc etc. The first four entries in the Battlefield series gave us a game that was a happy medium between crazy fast arcade FPS Unreal Tournament and a much more serious sim such as ARMA. Yes, far from a hardcore sim, but it was a balance and a balance that worked.
After 2004, PC games became ports of console games. PC gamers put up with it to an extent as long as they could still have PC things, like modding or running your own server. Then that was taken away and they got micro transactions, the Wilson Loot Box, and unfinished buggy games instead. At this point the main stream games industry, which EA is a major player in, no longer cared about games, and only about the extraction of wealth they believed they were entitled to.
The PC games industry has started to change in the last couple years. Elite Dangerous and others has revitalized the space sim which has been dead since the early oughts. Codemasters gave the fans Dirt Rally, which is much closer to Richard Burns Rally than the joke that was Dirt 3.
With the return of the Battlefield franchise to WWII, the PC gamers was hopeful the game would go back to it's roots back into that sweet spot between Unreal Tournament and ARMA. The Wilson loot box would hopefully be out after threat of government regulation. However the title being Battlefield V and not something like Battlefield 1942:2 gave foresight into the truth.
Male gamers play as female characters in RPGs and the like all of the time. There are quite a few games where a female is the primary protaganist in the game. You don't hear about an outrage with female characters in Overwatch or Fortnite. Normies don't care. What happened was DICE revealed the cyborg woman in a WW2 setting, and PC gamers realized they weren't going to get the game they were hoping for, and complained.
Nathan Grayson, of course, let all the SJWs know about the so sad sexist gamers complaining about there being women in the game in the most condescending way possible, and Mr. Grayson reignited Gamergate. EA/DICE went along with that narrative to cover up the fact they were releasing an unfinished game that their customers didn't want.
The authoritarian intersectionalist mob attacked the complainers and anyone who could understand their point of view, regardless if they agreed with it or not. They came out and called everyone gamerphobe slurs and accused them of sexism, racism, and ableism. The Gamergate wounds tore right open and EA/DICE agreed with the mob and told the gamers not to buy the game.
Local news is the only fact-based news left.
Um, you might want to think about that a bit more.
Yep. The real problem is the identity politics currently being pushed hard by progressives. Identity politics creates the toxic tribalism which the aggressors such as those evil Russians are able to manipulate to further divide us. Identity politics is the problem, the ability to manipulate Americans to further divide us is the symptom of the problem.
Them using their platforms to gather and sell data on users gives those who would manipulate us everything they need to successfully manipulate and divide us.
Internally, these platforms follow and believe in the identity politics being pushed by the progressives. This taints any action they do to counter the symptomof public manipulation into an action whose outcome will only serve to make it worse. Never mind profit motivates them to intensify the problem, or do nothing about it at best.
They are becoming the corporate equivalent of the Evergreen College. The investors should be calling for Pichai's head. The employees in non-leadership positions should not be dictating the company's direction by mob rule.
This is just ridiculous. ,I apologize, but I will give you my perspective from the point of view of the pharmacy.
I could be off base in your friends case. If I am
If your friend is not working due to medical reasons, he more than qualifies for medicaid. Since we are talking about medicaid coverage, this is a glimpse of what single payer would look like in the US. The state has determined what a sufficient amount of insulin use should be, therefore how much insulin they are going to pay for over a given period. It sounds like he is running afoul of this either in terms of blood testing supplies or the insulin itsself.
In the state of Washington, Medicare's guidelines are much more strict than the state's medicaid guidelines. Getting placed in medicare can be very disastrous short term for patients as now they are limited in brand of supplies and amount. They may have had dosing working in one brand, but the switch in brand is off enough where there has to be more experimentation, thus testing, to get it right. Then you find you can't get any more testing supplies for 2 more weeks unless you pay out of pocket.
As far as fighting with the state to get more supplies/insulin:
The only time the state's guidelines has been insufficient is in two cases:
1.The patient's diet does not meet the restrictions of their disease. I am talking about patients who buy 10 pounds of candy with their $3,000 worth of insulin every 2 weeks.
2. Older people. They aren't quite as sharp and technical as they used to be and have to retest more often due to mistakes or lapse in memory.
The real problem is the cost of the supplies and insulin itself. Mandated insurance / insurance coverage is detrimental to fixing this problem. As college tuition has skyrocketed due ease of access to student loans and government involvement, so has the cost of medication. The only medication that has decreased in price in my time in pharmacy are medications that are not usually covered by insurance. IE Viagra.
Many medications that were in the $5 - $10 range skyrocketed over $100 after Obamacare came into effect. This is mostly hidden from view because all people pay are copays, or nothing at all at pick up. The economics behind the counter are shielded from the general public. When insurance companies raise premiums or copays to cover this cost increase, everyone gets mad at the insurance companies and not at the drug manufacturers fleecing the entire system.
I will say that medicaid is paying the pharmacy $10 for insulin that costs us $80 to get from the wholesaler. We don't get paid to help your friend fight to get this stuff covered, which we do anyway. We lose money dispensing his medication to him. And when he is out and its not covered, chances are a pharmacist gave him a vial under the table. Keep this in mind when you see long lines at the pharmacy counter or it takes a bit longer than expected to get pick up your meds.
You might break it up into the social media part and then data analysis/advertising part.
Regulate via sound privacy law (one can dream) so the advertising spin off does not have total and complete access to the social media data and the social media part can sell this data to anyone within the regulatory framework.
The sound privacy law is the most important part followed by encouraging competition with what do to with the shareable data and where we want to go as a society with targeted ads.
I have the same thing happen to me a lot, only with Amazon instead of Facebook. For a recent example, I do the cooking in the household and enjoy doing so. I believe I was letting youtube run on its own in the background, and eventually it played some video on how to do sous-vide at home. I didn't know what sous-vide was so I did a some research on the technique on my iphone while it was running.
That was the full extent of it, a video played on my workstation, some wikipedia research on my iphone.
Despite using privacy badger and ublock origin, my apple id email is not the same as the email I use for google services, nor the same I use for amazon, no amazon app installed on the iphone, not being signed in to any website including youtube, wikipedia and amazon, the next morning Amazon sent me an email offering deal information on sous-vide cooking tools and supplies.
Am a little desensitized to it, but it still freaks me out a little every time this happens.
when everything here is a voluntary interaction and anybody who doesn't like it can stop playing.
Unfortunately, that is not true. Loot boxes were designed to create positive reinforcement that a certain percentage of the population gets addicted to and can't just stop.
Loot boxes are slot machines. You put in real money for that 1 in 100,000+ chance of a jackpot. They use flashing lights, streamers, music to create that positive reinforcemt just like the slot machine. They dangle a few free ones in front of you hoping to grab you in so you put down some real cash. They hope to cash in on the Gambler's Fallacy and grab more cash from you. For some, this will become a compulsive behavior they won't be able to stop.
If, say, 1 out of 100,000 Kinder Surprise eggs had a toy worth quite a bit more than what was paid for the Kinder Surprise, then its gambling.
If the Kinder Surprise shoots out stars and streamers every time they open, with greater fanfare depending on rarity of item, then they are using psychological manipulation to get you to buy more. If they give out a few Kinder Surprises marketed heavily to children to get them addicted to the positive feedback loop and giving false hopes that the 1 in 100,000 prize will be in the next egg purchased... they deserve the ban hammer of the law.
I am more curious in what will happen to collectible card games.
How about open sourcing the Midi Manager so we can run that on Windows 10.
I like my old games with MIDI music to use my hardware, not your awful software implementation.
He was in this one.
Your birth certificate is your contract.
I believe you are correct, though I believe they think we all sound like motor boats
I learned after watching Cooked that traditional aboriginal farming involves burning the grasslands and picking up the precooked critters. Climatologists blame the technique for all sorts of nastiness.
However, after reading some of the inconsistencies in the brief wikipedia article, I have to wonder if the aboriginals learned the technique from the birds.
That's what I'm wondering... could this be used to wrap Mars in a protective space blanket to protect its atmosphere from solar wind? If so, that's a pretty huge step in teraforming.
That's what I get for not reading the story. I thought the gold was disappearing into blizzards black hole, and you got an item that had no other link back to WoW.
It gets currency out of the local game's economy helping ease the high amount of inflation from a game that's ran for over a decade.
Ah, yes. Just like copyright law, the laws governing corporations are an abomination and perversion of what was originally intended.
In the beginning:
What the hell happened? Corporations made TONS of money off of the Civil War (Military-Industrial Complex?). Corporations bought influence and successfully eroded the protections given to the people by the founders and the states from such corporations as the East India Company.
Yes, I know we like to ridicule the founders as not being worthy of the pedestal they've been placed on. But they got a lot of things right that got royally screwed up over time. Corporations were not intended to be given power with the singular purpose of making money. They were intended to be given power to fulfill a purpose, and then dissolve when the purpose was fulfilled, or no longer necessary. The corporation would cease to exist if it violated any laws, and the people running the corporation would be held accountable for those actions. Almost sounds like a utopia.
The sad part about this is Reddit has admitted to changing posts to harass these guys before. It is just as likely that Reddit changed posts to look like these groups were doxxing and encouraging it just to take down them down over different ideology.
You have all rights. The Bill of Rights lists the rights Congress is explicitly never to infringe upon.
"The right there specified is that of "bearing arms for a lawful purpose." This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed, but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government, leaving the people to look for their protection against any violation by their fellow citizens of the rights it recognizes, to what is called, in The City of New York v. Miln, 11 Pet. 139, the "powers which relate to merely municipal legislation, or what was, perhaps, more properly called internal police," "not surrendered or restrained" by the Constitution of the United States."
I've seen the patent for this prior to this release. I was pretty confident it was disinformation so competitors wouldn't know what they were actually doing. I still believe that's case, and what this protype is.
It may have been George Lucas style revisionism, but it's been said the iPhone was a stepping stone to get to Jobs' goal of the iPad. The click wheel wouldn't fly. And I doubt AT&T would have redesigned their network and voicemail system for this either.
Jobs had a vision. For him Apple was not just a spreadsheet of metrics with which to extract the most amount of wealth from and then leave.
Jobs genuinely wanted to change the world with technology while also making a living at it. Was he a douche? Sure. Was he a manipulative son of a bitch? Perhaps. But he knew what he wanted to do and he seeked out the talent to make that happen.
Apple without a visionary is not Apple. Tim Cook and Jony Ives are not visionaries. I am without a doubt sure that the were the best people for the jobs they did while Jobs was there, however with out the direction/management that Jobs brought to the table, Apple is just adrift.
That spark Jobs, Gates, Hewlet, Packard, all the former great tech founders had is gone and have been replaced with out of sync number crunchers only interested in cost cutting and maximizing profit.
You could be right. To me it sounds like both the battery design was too aggressive for current technology as well as the space allowed for the battery to do its thing was insufficient. If they replaced the battery, it would have to be less aggressive, lower capacity design plus a reduction in the battery's physical size.
The resulting battery may have been insufficient for the phone in a way that was unacceptable to the marketing guys. If the phone only has 1 to 2 hours of power with the fix, the hit to the brand may have been calculated to be too great than just doing a recall and going back to the drawing board.
Which circles back to can you censor ideas you don't agree with on your platform? If you say the cake maker has to serve people he doesn't like, then the cake maker must also put tweets on his cake even if he doesn't agree with it.
Availability or the number of people who have insurance has no validity as a metric on quality or affordability of healthcare.
Insurance is the problem with healthcare in America. Forcing people to buy the problem isn't going to fix healthcare. Subsidies on the problem isn't going to fix healthcare. Just because you are paying for the problem doesn't mean you are entitled to or receive any better healthcare than anyone else.
Paying for the problem doesn't make healthcare cheaper, it makes it more expensive. The problem with healthcare makes it more expensive for people who don't pay for the problem.
We either need to go full on single payer or complete remove health insurance all together.