• Thatuserguy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 year ago

    Awesome, so does this mean all the rich old dudes ruining everything for everyone else get to continue to do so for longer? You just know something like this would be prohibitively expensive to the general populace. Really exciting.

        • wahming@monyet.cc
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Universal healthcare is a thing. The US is possibly the only first world exception. I live in Norway, and pay a maximum of $250 a year on medical expenses. Everything else gets covered by the govt.

          • vind@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m aware. However, things like this feel like it would be considered beauty care which generally is not considered to be applicable for universal healthcare.

            • wahming@monyet.cc
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              1 year ago

              Age-related symptoms and diseases are the biggest burden on healthcare infrastructure. Anything that reduces said impact would definitely fall under healthcare.

              • vind@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Yes, but history this doesn’t support that belief. Unfortunately