VetOfTheSeas@discuss.online to Work Reform@lemmy.world · 2 months ago"No precedent in American history!" NYT would have defended child labor.discuss.onlineimagemessage-square207linkfedilinkarrow-up11.57Karrow-down17
arrow-up11.56Karrow-down1image"No precedent in American history!" NYT would have defended child labor.discuss.onlineVetOfTheSeas@discuss.online to Work Reform@lemmy.world · 2 months agomessage-square207linkfedilink
minus-squarequeeradjacent@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up4·2 months agoI’m curious as well. It just states a fact (well, it would abolish a lot of private insurance but not all, headlines aren’t always perfect), why is the assumption in the comments that it is somehow in favor of private insurance?
I’m curious as well. It just states a fact (well, it would abolish a lot of private insurance but not all, headlines aren’t always perfect), why is the assumption in the comments that it is somehow in favor of private insurance?