> “Especially in today’s climate, there are families where the child is a citizen and the parent is an immigrant, and they’re fearful of interacting with government,” Alker says. But such fears can only explain a small proportion of those who are uninsured, she notes.
So what's your goal here? My patience level is incredibly thin for people that are very clearly taking the article out of context to push some remarkably dumb agenta.
My point is, and remains, that you can't use figures like the one that headlines the article if it includes unrelated data like foreign nationals. The reasoning is because it ends with the exact situation we have now. What we know for sure is the US has a free health care system (ACA) for those who actually need it, I know because I've used it. What we don't know is how many children are uninsured, because the data they're relying on is worthless. Using fake data and then claiming "it's probably not off by much" doesn't contribute much to the overall discussion.
I'd also like to point out HN isn't really for political discussion, it's for technical discussion. This is a methodology issue in the article, not my personal opinions on US health care.
> “Especially in today’s climate, there are families where the child is a citizen and the parent is an immigrant, and they’re fearful of interacting with government,” Alker says. But such fears can only explain a small proportion of those who are uninsured, she notes.
So what's your goal here? My patience level is incredibly thin for people that are very clearly taking the article out of context to push some remarkably dumb agenta.