4 ms·

I mean... it was an improvement, and certainly did enable coverage for a lot of people who otherwise would have gone without. But it was such a lost opportunity

I mean... it was an improvement, and certainly did enable coverage for a lot of people who otherwise would have gone without. But it was such a lost opportunity, and I wish the Dems could just own up to that and push for something more. The problem is that both sides are so deep in the industry’s pockets, that I don’t think real reform is even possible.

WarOnPrivacy 6y ago
> it was an improvement and ... enabled coverage for a lot of people This is kind of my point. The ACA was designed to benefit the middle class and non-vulnerable. At which point the middle class and non-vulnerable (and the press) stopped caring about who had healthcare. To drive home that point: A few years ago I ran ACA quotes for typical income levels (typical for non-wealthy regions, 12k-32k) and found that premium cost steeply dropped for each 10k rise in income. My primary issue isn't that this happened, it's that we weren't told. It's that ACA supporters + the entirety of press compulsively gloss over ACA realities. > I wish the Dems could just own up to that and push for something more. I suggest that uncovered Americans don't need something more. They need something. > The problem is that both sides are so deep in the industry’s pockets, that I don’t think real reform is even possible. Pols trading law/power for campaign cash is the other thing that news orgs have ~0 interest in.