Why Trump is the worst President in modern history

[OriZ 3,157]

11 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

So it will be healthcare for those that aren't seriously sick.  If you do get sick, just wait a year or so and maybe you can see a specialist, or surgeon, or maybe you will die.  Actually, if you die, that will be the best for the single payer entity right?

 

I expect we will end up with single payer which appears be something President Trump is for.  I just hope everyone understands that wait times for serious illnesses will increase, just look at Canada.

I'm not too familiar with the Canadian system, but I have given the Israeli one as an example in the past and pointed out the several pros as well as cons of the system. However, at least over there wait times are usually not one of them. In fact I find wait times in the US even under "normal insurance" to be much more of an issue. However, single payer while two words, can actually mean a million different things(as evident but the difference between the systems different countries have) so I don't really have an opinion about it per se but I'm open minded. What I would like to see, is some serious research getting done, there are dozens of countries to learn from and there is no need to reinvent the wheel. They need to stop being lazy, check out what actually works in those places and what doesn't, and come up with a decent plan. If that happens, I will support it. But there are many things, government inefficiency among them that it will need to tackle.

Edited June 2, 2017 by OriZ

[OriZ 3,157]

11 hours ago, Teddy B said:

So only "seriously sick" people deserve and require healthcare? Preventative healthcare that includes  check-ups, patient counseling and screenings to prevent illness, disease and other health-related problems is just a sham? I don't understand your logic.

 

No system is perfect, but single payer appears to be the best for everyone on a grand scale. Sure there will be some wait times for procedures, but for the most part no one goes without the healthcare they need. Usually the most critical illnesses and procedures take precedent over the lesser ones.

I do agree with the part in bold that that is very important, and damn near impossible to do in the US unless you want to pay alot of money, which is why many people end up sick when it could have been avoided to start with.

[Bugs 455]

2 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I'm not too familiar with the Canadian system, but I have given the Israeli one as an example in the past and pointed out the several pros as well as cons of the system. However, at least over there wait times are usually not one of them. In fact I find wait times in the US even under "normal insurance" to be much more of an issue. However, single payer while two words, can actually mean a million different things(as evident but the difference between the systems different countries have) so I don't really have an opinion about it per se but I'm open minded. What I would like to see, is some serious research getting done, there are dozens of countries to learn from and there is no need to reinvent the wheel. They need to stop being lazy, check out what actually works in those places and what doesn't, and come up with a decent plan. If that happens, I will support it. But there are many things, government inefficiency among them that it will need to tackle.

 

No system will ever be perfect.  But that's why we have a democracy and why fixes can be done to tinker here and there.  I do believe that the system as practiced by almost all developed nations except us is probably the best solution that society has come up with, and which is definitely better than any system we've come up with, pre-ACA, ACA, or AHCA.

[OriZ 3,157]

12 minutes ago, Leon & Mylen said:

 

No system will ever be perfect.  But that's why we have a democracy and why fixes can be done to tinker here and there.  I do believe that the system as practiced by almost all developed nations except us is probably the best solution that society has come up with, and which is definitely better than any system we've come up with, pre-ACA, ACA, or AHCA.

Again, there are pros and cons. It's easy for Americans to argue in favor of systems they have not actually had to live with, I lived with it for 25 years of my life. I'm not saying it's a bad system and I've said today and in the past I will support a solution as long as it is thoroughly researched and studies and learns from the less positive experiences of countries that already have those systems in place. It's not the utopia liberals think it is nor is it the hell conservatives believe it is.

[Bugs 455]

7 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Again, there are pros and cons. It's easy for Americans to argue in favor of systems they have not actually had to live with, I lived with it for 25 years of my life. I'm not saying it's a bad system and I've said today and in the past I will support a solution as long as it is thoroughly researched and studies and learns from the less positive experiences of countries that already have those systems in place. It's not the utopia liberals think it is nor is it the hell conservatives believe it is.

If given a choice between our pre-ACA system, ACA, ACHA, or a universal/single payer system, which would you chose?  

[OriZ 3,157]

36 minutes ago, Leon & Mylen said:

If given a choice between our pre-ACA system, ACA, ACHA, or a universal/single payer system, which would you chose?  

Like I said, single payer is two words but means millions of different things. So I can't answer that without a specific plan.

[spookyturtle 9,465]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

Again, there are pros and cons. It's easy for Americans to argue in favor of systems they have not actually had to live with, I lived with it for 25 years of my life. I'm not saying it's a bad system and I've said today and in the past I will support a solution as long as it is thoroughly researched and studies and learns from the less positive experiences of countries that already have those systems in place. It's not the utopia liberals think it is nor is it the hell conservatives believe it is.

How can anything be learned from studies? If the study comes up with something you disagree with, you can just say it was irrelevant,  done by the left, or the right, or the wealthy, or the poor, or the environmentalists, or big business...........Not you personally, but that would be the reaction of those who disagreed. 

[OriZ 3,157]

2 minutes ago, spookyturtle said:

How can anything be learned from studies? If the study comes up with something you disagree with, you can just say it was irrelevant,  done by the left, or the right, or the wealthy, or the poor, or the environmentalists, or big business...........Not you personally, but that would be the reaction of those who disagreed. 

Well what would be relevant is the end product. I really don't care if it's the left, the right the wealthy or all of them - if the end product was something I agreed with, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But I wouldn't look at who came up with it - I'd look at the substance of it. 

[spookyturtle 9,465]

2 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Well what would be relevant is the end product. I really don't care if it's the left, the right the wealthy or all of them - if the end product was something I agreed with, then I wouldn't have a problem with it. But I wouldn't look at who came up with it - I'd look at the substance of it. 

Key phrase, if you agreed with it. Some things are true but people don't agree. Some people think they can drive drunk and it doesn't affect the way they drive. Ditto for drugs. 

[OriZ 3,157]

7 hours ago, spookyturtle said:

Key phrase, if you agreed with it. Some things are true but people don't agree. Some people think they can drive drunk and it doesn't affect the way they drive. Ditto for drugs. 

Well of course if I agreed with it, because I was talking about my position, not others. And my opinion is the only one that counts 

[Dashinka 24,488]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

Well of course if I agreed with it, because I was talking about my position, not others. And my opinion is the only one that counts 

I wanted to give you a +1, but I see you are at 1,666, so I thought you would enjoy being the devil a little longer!   

[Teddy B 17,252]

8 hours ago, spookyturtle said:

Key phrase, if you agreed with it. Some things are true but people don't agree. Some people think they can drive drunk and it doesn't affect the way they drive. Ditto for drugs. 

Steve agrees.

 

 

[OriZ 3,157]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

I wanted to give you a +1, but I see you are at 1,666, so I thought you would enjoy being the devil a little longer!   

I got two more so no longer a devil, go ahead