this post was submitted on 16 Oct 2025
1318 points (99.7% liked)

Progressive Politics

3403 readers
546 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 173 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (45 children)

Controversial take (though maybe not in this community):

If it's needed for survival, it should be free. No exceptions.

[–] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (7 children)

Devil's advocate: Medi-CAL (California's Medicaid program, already known for being very permissive) will likely already cover it for the eligible, and should the $11 be used in aggregate to cover distribution and manufacturing for all of California's citizens, it would be a reasonable rate to keep the program self-sustaining.

Allotting an exception for the payment for those who may have difficulty seems like a reasonable way to cover any gaps while making sure it never runs into the red.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 16 points 6 days ago (6 children)

The funny thing is if memory serves right insulin once you get it going is exceptionally cheap to produce. Unironically the 11 bucks may very well be the gross cost of production and transport per batch, probably not wages though.

[–] misterred@feddit.online 2 points 6 days ago

In most likely scenarios the social amortization should cover everyone including production/transportation labor.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (42 replies)