> All this talk of "truth" and "duty" implies some larger context in which such abstractions would be evaluated.

I suppose not engaging with these principles however vague would reduce down to an immediate, might makes right cause-benefit analysis for any given situation. I think it's probably good that people still hold themselves to some standards, regardless of how universally comparable they are across different people.

> “All this talk of "truth" and "duty" implies some larger context…”

I’m not a philosopher, but I enjoy reading philosophy. From my reading, I would bisect the whole of judgments of this sort into ethics and morality. Simply making ethics the domain of “what is good in and of itself” and morality as adding the social dimension. Once you add the matter of social good, everything becomes more complex. Nevertheless, health, welfare and a host of other matters are good in and of themselves.

anyone making below $1,799/mo, with no asset test

Is that how it worked in 2005?

Federal requirements for Medicaid starting in January will result in large numbers of people losing coverage.

This took place in 2005, nearly a decade before Medicaid expansion went into effect.

That's a lot of asterisks for a gotcha. We need universal healthcare yesterday. We are barbaric.

Q: How much does generic/biosimilar insulin cost in the US if you aren't insured? Does this vary by state?

and if he was living in the other states?

By revealed preference, modern academia is about churning incremental papers in order to obtain tenure and research grants.

There are whole disciplines whose telos is now activism rather than knowledge production.

https://cdn.vanderbilt.edu/vu-wpfsx/wp-content/uploads/sites...

Venture capitalists and Silicon Valley have strong anti-intellectual tendencies as a whole. See how many founders pride themselves of being drop-outs and how many of them openly reject humanism and liberal arts. HN is mainly a plattform of Ycombinator to advertise and find like-minded workforce.