• SCB@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    Where in the article does it say her life is destroyed?

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Well since this is a thread about the article, one would assume you’d be on-topic.

        Also you have 0 evidence that her life is destroyed. An MRI isn’t very expensive if you’re insured, and she’s almost certainly insured, because she, ya know, got a fucking MRI.

        So what exactly was the point there?

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            I read the chain, and it’s 2 comments long, and that one person randomly brought up healthcare systems as a total non-sequitor.

            The original comment is about her damaging the machine. It stands to reason this person thought she was on the hook for the damages, which is never discussed in the article, nor is damage confirmed.

            • EatATaco@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              11 months ago

              She should be garneshed

              “Should” being the operative word here. The top level comment using should “in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency.”

              The next poster says that this is “not a good response” because it would destroy her life.

              They are disagreeing over what should happen, not what is happening.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                11 months ago

                Right but then also this

                The problem of healthcare in the USA is way more severe than a destroyed MRI machine.

                I’m just not sure how people aren’t getting why someone might be confused by this entire exchange

                • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  I agree that part was a non-sequitur. I even thought so myself when I first passed over it.

                  But the other part of the exchange is not confusing at all and there’s zero indication that anyone thought she is actually on the hook for any damages. I’m more-so confused how you could not pick up the meaning even after a re-read.

                  • SCB@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    Dude until your above comment I was confused as fuck.

                    Maybe I need more coffee.

        • MojoMcJojo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          MRI machines cost between $150,000 to $3,000,000. To me, specifically, that’s prohibitively expensive. I assume given the circumstances she’s in a significant amount of trouble, with a lethal weapon being grossly mishandled to the point of putting others lives at risk. But, to your credit, that assumption was not clearly attributed in the original post. I think the important thing here is not the disagreements we have in the comments, but the up votes we get along the way.