> Are we supposed to accept the idea that an IV drug user sharing needles contracts HIV and they never have to work again even though they'll be getting medication which completely suppresses the virus and will leave a largely normal lifespan?

Is that the price of the “right” people being exempted? Then sure.

Also simply having HIV doesn’t mean you’re terminally ill.

Maybe your argument works for a few specific cases, what about those that do not meet that? What about someone with stage 4 cancer who needs radiation and will likely live a year or two longer without treatment? Without treatment they can't recover, without recovering they can't go to work; their body is literally dying.

With treatment they might be able to live, work and recover. That is what the article is saying. Without insurance people die from cancer. With insurance some people do not die. If we cut their insurance due to more red tape, we're condemning those to death.

Weird that you comment on rage bait and end your comment with the idea that this group of people are all a bunch of worthless drug users.

Medicaid defines terminally ill as under 6 months to live. So there's no risk of someone mooching off the system for decades.

Parkinson's lol do you know what that actually looks like? It's degenerative. In a country where only the poor are expected to do all the work, seems fair to me that when they cannot work, the state provides them at least a meagre allowance. What exactly should they do, waste away and starve to death? Pay for it with the money from some billionaire who doesn't work for a living

It all depends on how “a terminal diagnosis” is defined.

Is someone that is 30 years old, HIV positive, and on antiretrovirals with a low viral load considered a terminal diagnosis? HIV may end their life in 40 years but they’re clearly capable of working.

The article does say “medically frail” people are exempted, so Stage 4 pancreatic cancer would be enough to exempt someone from the rules, but where the line is drawn does matter.

Don't know why people downvote and flag your comment, vouched for it.

HN votes are a not designed to be "agree/disagree", they supposed to mark interesting comments that spark curiosity, even if I disagree with them. Your comment is the only one like that here.