Can RFK Jr. Fix Our Dysfunctional Public Health Agencies? : politicsunfiltered

[–] noride@lemm.ee 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No.

[+] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I don't know that he'll fix it, but he's def gonna make some changes. Now if those are good or bad changes, I have no clue. But it's gonna be interesting.

[–] Clasm@ttrpg.network 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

"Interesting" policies in health and wellness in this context only means that it's going to get a lot of people killed.

[+] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He hasn't implemented anything yet, so I'll wait to see what happens before I judge the policies since we have no idea what will happen.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hold a brick above your foot and let go.

You have no idea what will happen! It could be anything! It could even be a boat!

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But I know what happens when I hold a brick when I let it go. We don't know what will happen when RFK takes over some public health agencies.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

You've dropped a brick on your foot, specifically? That exact sequence of events? Nothing else could prepare you to say what would happen. Was it a brown brick? Have you tried red? What about cinderblocks?

We know goddamn well what putting a denialist crank in charge of public health would do to public health.

This is the party trying to ban certain medicines. It's gonna be awful for everyone. Anything else would be as surprising as if you let go, and the brick fell up.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I won't make any judgements until we see what happens.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Give me all your money and I'll give you twice as much.

[+] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Comrade, I get it, you're mad. But that doesn't change the fact that Trump wants to put him in charge. He hasn’t implemented anything yet, so I’ll wait to see what happens before I judge the policies since we have no idea what will happen.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

We have a crystal clear idea what will happen. You're just acting gullible.

'Maybe it'll go fine!' Yeah and maybe he'll discover infinite energy, or turn off the sun with a snap of his fingers. You never know!

And I do mean you never know. You're espousing willful ignorance of the blindingly obvious, as if expected outcomes are a fucking mystery.

Any single one of this crank's policies is a disaster, by itself. The antivax bullshit alone should be criminal. Altogether - it's gonna be fucking awful, and your aggressive shrugging will not change that. Stop trying to excuse and diminish the severity of this problem.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You’re espousing willful ignorance of the blindingly obvious, as if expected outcomes are a fucking mystery.

Dude, calm down. I didn't vote for the guy. Go outside, touch some grass, and don't get so worked up over a Lemmy post.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

> post infuriating nonsense

> defend infuriating nonsense

'Gosh, why are people on my ass today? Must be a them problem.'

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I don't think people are "on my ass today" at all. I think you're mad and you're lashing out because you feel powerless.

I'm not the guy who you should be mad at, friend. Trump won both the electoral vote and the popular vote.

Seems like you have a lot of work to do. Thanks.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I am specifically taking issue with your conduct in this thread. You, personally, are saying indefensible things, regarding this severe looming threat. Your aggressive apathy is not neutral.

Sneering "touch grass" doesn't even make sense - this is real life. People will die. This dangerous moron, this animal-corpse enthusiast with li-ter-al brain worms, will damage civic health. His mere public presence has harmed some people's trust in medicine... as a concept.

Putting such an unambiguous nutjob in charge of the nation's healthcare structure is not a "guess we'll see!" situation.

And here you are posting a libertarian rag stroking its chin about whether the impending shit-storm will burn down the right parts of the federal government. Then you feign ignorance of what he's plainly going to do, given half a chance, and what it's plainly going to impact, given half a thought. The brick is falling and you're staring intently - wondering what's gonna happen to your toes.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

you, personally, are saying indefensible things, regarding this severe looming threat

What? Such as?

Friend, your anger and attitude suggest that you probably should block this community. It's not worth it to get so worked up over a fucking Lemmy community that you can just opt out of.

All I said was that RFK hasn't been put in charge of anything yet. And I have no idea what will happen, so I won't make a judgment until something does.

That's not "aggressive apathy." That's common sense. We don't even know if he'll actually end up in the position.

I didn't vote for Trump, nor did I vote for his administration. But I'm still not going to jump on the "holy shit, the world is gonna end!" bandwagon.

I have a wait-and-see attitude. I make no apologies for it. You disagree, and that's fine. But to say that I'm being aggressive in this thread is incorrect.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

What? Such as?

Such as:

And I have no idea what will happen, so I won’t make a judgment until something does. [...] That’s common sense.

Common sense is, don't drop a brick on your foot. "Common sense" is shorthand for expecting the fucking obvious. That's what makes it common.

If you put a medicine-denying crank in charge of medicine - that's gonna go badly, for medicine. Obviously. Pretending it's ambiguous is actively harmful. It's tantamount to 'Nevermind what he's said and done so far, let's give this Hitler guy a chance!' Yeah yeah yeah you didn't vote for him, I never asked, I don't care. This is about what you keep saying right here in this thread - no matter how badly you want to project emotion onto me, as a means of dismissing that criticism.

You are promoting sane-washing of a dangerous idiot. You chose this article. You posted this article. You defend this article. Yet when people point out, it's nonsense, they're liars, and he's a loon - 'oh well, who's to say, shrug.' That's bullshit. There's no excuse.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

lol You are losing it, friend. You got set off by me saying I won't make a judgment until something happens. LMAO

You need to step back, and go outside for a bit, friend.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This is trolling. You're labeling repeated detailed effort to explain the problem as if it's angry, and then using that label to pretend that means it's irrelevant. Polite phrasing doesn't make this tone policing any less abusive. It's still 'I have drawn you as the soyjak.'

Meanwhile.

Back at the point:

Outside is where this very real and very obvious problem is going to happen. The brick will in fact crush your foot. RFK's policies will be disastrous, as anyone capable of forming an opinion should immediately know. Pretending it's debatable would be laughable, but you're not even pretending it's debatable; you are insisting it's undecidable. As if you cannot know what the brick, already in mid-air, may do.

Take your own advice for self-reflection and ask yourself why on Earth you posted this article, if your opinion of it is performative detachment.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

What?! lololol Bruh, it's not trolling.

Do you realize that I created and mod this community?! I get to post whatever I want as long as it doesn't break laws or break rules of this instance.

I posted the article because I found it interesting. It doesn't mean I endorse anything or everything in it.

You got mad. I told you I wasn't mad because I will hold off on judgement. That's not trolling. I didn't post this article to piss people off or to piss you off. Just because you happened to be pissed off, has nothing to do with me. Do you even know what trolling is?!

Let me guess, next you'll drop the phrase "sealioning" too. lol

You need to just stop and move on. No matter how mad you get, I'm not changing my mind or making a judgement on the situation until something happens. And I'm not removing the article. I thought it was interesting to hear what conservatives were saying.

You chose to come here, you chose to read the article, you chose to reply, and you choose not to leave. That's 100% on you.

I'm nto even a freakin conservative. I'm a socialist. Move on.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

'This is a bad article about a bad person. You keep saying 'I know nothing.' How is it interesting if you claim no opinion?'

'LMAO YOU MAD? YOU'RE SO ANGERY! WHY YOU SO MAD?! What no that's not trolling. How dare you.'

Why does anyone bother.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 month ago

I'm not changing this community, this post, or my attitude.

Please feel free to block me and/or this community if you despise it so much. Thanks!

[–] swordgeek@lemmy.ca 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Not a fucking chance. Zero. That question shouldn't even be asked, because it implies the existence of doubt.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But is putting Robert Kennedy Jr. in charge of HHS the right way to fix them?

Hahahahaha, no.

I'm not sure the premise is even sound, that the CDC, FDA and NIH have "long needed drastic reform". But, if that were true, you'd want an expert in leadership and management to address the problem, not a fucking nutjob. To reform those agencies, you'd need someone who the bureaucracies would trust has the same goals they do. Sure, there would always be people who would not want any reform, but you would also have allies who agree something needs to change, and who would support the necessary changes. Nobody at those agencies is going to listen to a fucking nutjob. Instead, they'd do everything possible to sabotage everything he was trying.

"Back in 2017, RFK Jr. talked with then-President Trump about setting up a vaccine safety review commission"

The fucking nutjob is an antivaxxer. That would be like putting a flat-earther in charge of NASA.

The whole premise is stupid. An opinion piece in a rabidly libertarian rag declares that these agencies need reform, citing other opinion pieces articles from this same rabidly libertarian rag.

These agencies may need some tweaks, but Reason magazine isn't a reputable source for what changes are needed, and RFK junior is definitely not the person who should be in charge of anything. If he tries, at best he'll merely fail. At worst he'll do serious damage to these important agencies that will take years to undo.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

but Reason magazine isn’t a reputable source

You make a lot of great points, but I disagree about Reason not being a reputable source. I like them.

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yes, but that means you're not a reputable source.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Well, you are totally welcome to think that. I respect your right to feel that way. But I'll keep posting stuff from Reason, because I like them. Thanks!

[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Liking them isn't enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They're not. They're incredibly biased and their bias is towards a world view that's absurd. Just because your filter bubble feels good doesn't mean it's not harmful to you.

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -4 points 1 month ago

Liking them isn’t enough, they should be a reliable source of factual information. They’re not.

I happen to think they are pretty reliable, and def not any less reliable than most news orgs. All news orgs are biased.

I don't think anyone on Lemmy can really talk about "filter bubble." I mean, Lemmy is an even bigger filter bubble than reddit! lol

But hey, I like them. I totally get lots of others don't. I'm cool with you thinking that. All good, friend!

[–] Tar_alcaran@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I like The Onion, buuuut...

[–] UniversalMonk@sh.itjust.works -3 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Then feel free to start your own community and post The Onion articles.

I created this community. And I allow posting from the Daily Mail.

Be the change you wanna see, comrade.

[–] starman2112@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Yes, by convincing a bunch of conservatives to kill themselves with listeria thus driving the population of America quickly to the left

Politics Unfiltered