
In 2010, I had good union health insurance. Obamacare was the law of the land - DoreenMichele
https://twitter.com/DuBarryPie/status/1231669876122505216
======
DoreenMichele
For the record:

Her final tweet is a political endorsement. That is not why I posted this.

I wasn't going to say anything because I didn't really expect this to get
traction. But now it has comments.

~~~
masonic

      I didn't really expect this to get traction
    

Most of your submits anymore are just tweets, and most of _those_ have been
both inflammatory and unvetted. Some were even deleted the same day.

I think it's time that Twitter and Reddit be disallowed as submit sources. If
a submitter can't find _one_ actual source article or even a blog entry (or
bother to write one themselves!) with supporting references or corresponding
content, it doesn't belong here.

~~~
DoreenMichele
There are tweets that do well here. I've had tweets I posted hit the front
page.

[https://hn.algolia.com/?q=doreenmichele+twitter.com](https://hn.algolia.com/?q=doreenmichele+twitter.com)

This is a large enough forum that it's reasonable to assume by default that
most posts will not get traction.

I go through periods where I mostly post from Twitter, but that doesn't
constitute the majority of my submissions. I don't post stuff to be
inflammatory. I post stuff I think is interesting for some reason. Just
because I think it's interesting doesn't guarantee it will be interesting to
anyone here.

I'm perfectly happy to write and post original content, but I also get crabbed
at for submitting blog entries I wrote myself. At least some of that appears
to be a case of "sexism is alive and well."

------
masonic
"Obamacare was the law of the land."

In fact, Obamacare didn't _begin_ to take effect until 2014, 4 years later.

------
mcv
These stories of how predatory the American health care and health insurance
system is, never fail to disgust me.

------
SCAQTony
Something fishy about this story, but let's presume it is 100% true. Medicare
for all would be much bigger than Obamacare; in fact, the physical
infrastructure and the workforce infrastructure is not in place to service the
entire population. Most people on Medicare today have to wait months for
doctors and surgeries. VA hospitals have trouble servicing veterans in a
timely and professional manner.

To have Medicare for all would require a Doctor and Nurses Corps, thousands of
hospitals would have to be erected and staffed. It's not going to happen,
especially with a hostile Senate and no mandate from the public at large. A
public option remains overall more popular than Medicare for All, according to
a Kaiser Hospital poll.

~~~
chrisseaton
Why couldn’t all the existing doctors, nurses, and hospitals be used? There
won’t suddenly be double the population.

~~~
SCAQTony
Population growth would not surge, but demand for healthcare would. If the
Veterans Administration hospitals and local community hospitals cannot
adequately service the health needs of their respective communities quickly,
that indicates to me more infrastructure and medical personnel have to be
created. Doing this would be is a good thing. This infrastructure should be
rolled out with deliberate thought rather than by the stroke of a pen.

Some people want to keep their employer insurance due to quality and service.
They don't want to see their employer cancel it to save money once Medicare
for all is in play. When healthcare in Great Britain or Sweeden is mention as
a solution, it looks and sounds good on paper, but the US has over 327-million
people versus Great Britain's 67-million and Sweden's 11-million population.

From Wikipedia" "...The Swedish health care system is mainly government-
funded, universal for all citizens and decentralized, although private health
care also exists. A shortage of medical personnel is a major problem. The
health care system in Sweden is financed primarily through taxes levied by
county councils and municipalities." I can't imagine what the shortages of
doctors and nurses in the US would be. YMMV.

------
duckMuppet
It sounds great until the govt decides you aren't viable, or you're to old or
young to be worth financials strain put upon the system.

Perhaps you're of the wrong political, religious or cultural persuasion and a
bureaucrat determines that you aren't selected for treatment.

Ultimately, the people get what they deserve i suppose.

~~~
mcv
> _" It sounds great until the govt decides you aren't viable, or you're to
> old or young to be worth financials strain put upon the system."_

I think you mean "insurance company", not "govt", there. Private insurers in
the US have a history of doing stuff like this. Government-run health
insurance systems tend to cover everybody with a lot less red tape than this.

