What a wonderful idea. For larger teams with bigger budgets, they could make the credits interactive. They don't need to just scroll past! Make it fun. Like a family tree or idea web where you can pan around, zoom in, etc.

I agree with that approach in principle, but he specifically says people will pay for care they can afford. So there needs to be a process in place for determining what is affordable on an individual basis, which could be challenging. If it's a stopgap solution until we get M4A, I'm fine with that.

You made the comparison to how we assess taxes, so I was responding specifically to that. I did read his blog post and agree with much of it. I just want to know how he'd determine what is considered affordable. He asks for feedback, and that's what my question was. I'm still thinking about this too

Sure but not based purely on income, as taxes are.

Taxes are predictable and can be planned for, not necessarily true for medical expenses.

How do we determine what a patient can't afford to pay?

What did NYT political reporters think of your analysis?

How concerned are you about NYT political reporters' apparent inability to ever say Trump or Vance lies?

3/3
one opening will be "the one." Both parties will turn to more friction-y platforms, in the hopes of facing less competition. Will it be any better? One can only hope.

2/3 the applications abyss that every posting creates, where hundreds of resumes and cover letters go to die. Meanwhile, desperate job seekers will exhaust themselves editing resumes and cover letters for the nth time and prostrating themselves before the algorithm that this