Donald Trump says 70% of federal regulations could go

[BULLDOG]

Sadly, americans by and large are clueless as to the labor, environmental, and property rights struggles history of this land mass. Regulations arose to constrain the feudalistic urges of concentrated power and wealth, but of course, concentrated power and wealth will always be reaching for more. The masses have been very well programmed to distrust govt, over which they at least have the pretense of the vote for representation, so they turn to concentrated corporate power for refuge and salvation, a framework within which they have no say at all. It is a form of human sacrifice.

Well regardless of what you claim... the fact is regulations have done more to do exactly what you claim they were created to contain.

Regulations concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few, because the many can't afford to meet those regulations, and thus are unable to compete with the few.

Sure the wealthy will always be reaching for more. If you could not profit from doing something... you wouldn't do it. Same with the rich. No rich person spends millions to invest in a project they know will lose money. You wouldn't either.

But what regulations do, is keep YOU and ME and the average citizen from being able to reach for more ourselves. Now only the wealthy can reach for more, because they are the only ones with the financial ability to meet those regulations. You and me.... we go broke, can't compete.

Regulations always benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor. Yeah, trying to prevent that may have been the argument for making those regulations, but this is the practical result regardless of intentions.

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

Right, and every person wants to believe that regulations is what did that.

If you want to believe in myths, that's fine. But it's not the truth.

Before regulations existed, working conditions were improving. Before the EPA ever existed, pollution was decreasing.

The left-wing likes to pretend that regulations are the only reason we have clean water. This is entirely false.

The left-wing likes to pretend the only reason we have a safe place to work, is because of regulations. That is entirely false.

I can cite hundreds of examples. The very first big work place safety push, was in the rail road industry, when the rail companies started installing air brakes on cargo trains to reduce accidents and injuries. It wasn't because of government, or any regulations. It was business making that push, and it always has been.

It wasn't government that improved the safety standards on cars. It was car companies. If car companies had never created an air bag system, the government would never have required them to be installed.

Regulations only make it more costly for people to buy the products they need or want. They never make the products they buy better. The companies making the products do that.

You're a blithering idiot. You really believe child labor laws were not needed, or that factories stopped spewing their polluted crap without laws to require that? You're an idiot.

 

[rightwinger]

Each regulation should be evaluated on its own merits asking

Who does it hurt?
Who does it help?
Is it still a valid regulation

Same should be done with each tax incentive

 

[esthermoon]

Donald Trump says 70% of federal regulations could go - Full story

"US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said he could cut as many as 70% of federal US regulations if he is elected.

Mr Trump, who was speaking at an event in New Hampshire, blamed regulations for stifling business but said rules on safety and the environment could stay."

Thoughts? Do you think he will stick to his word? Is this a good or bad thing?

I'm almost totally ignorant about US Constitution but repealing 70% of federal regulations seems pretty impossible...
How the federal government could work?

 

[Fenton Lum]

Oh, I'm sure Trump is aware of real estate regulations he would like to get rid of.....Environmental protections, building codes, labor laws, eminent domain protections

Sadly, americans by and large are clueless as to the labor, environmental, and property rights struggles history of this land mass. Regulations arose to constrain the feudalistic urges of concentrated power and wealth, but of course, concentrated power and wealth will always be reaching for more. The masses have been very well programmed to distrust govt, over which they at least have the pretense of the vote for representation, so they turn to concentrated corporate power for refuge and salvation, a framework within which they have no say at all. It is a form of human sacrifice.

Well regardless of what you claim... the fact is regulations have done more to do exactly what you claim they were created to contain.

Regulations concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few, because the many can't afford to meet those regulations, and thus are unable to compete with the few.

Sure the wealthy will always be reaching for more. If you could not profit from doing something... you wouldn't do it. Same with the rich. No rich person spends millions to invest in a project they know will lose money. You wouldn't either.

But what regulations do, is keep YOU and ME and the average citizen from being able to reach for more ourselves. Now only the wealthy can reach for more, because they are the only ones with the financial ability to meet those regulations. You and me.... we go broke, can't compete.

Regulations always benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor. Yeah, trying to prevent that may have been the argument for making those regulations, but this is the practical result regardless of intentions.

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Donald Trump says 70% of federal regulations could go - Full story

"US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has said he could cut as many as 70% of federal US regulations if he is elected.

Mr Trump, who was speaking at an event in New Hampshire, blamed regulations for stifling business but said rules on safety and the environment could stay."

Thoughts? Do you think he will stick to his word? Is this a good or bad thing?

I'm almost totally ignorant about US Constitution but repealing 70% of federal regulations seems pretty impossible...
How the federal government could work?

That's the point, to interrupt and obstruct the govt actually working for all in society.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Trump wants to do away with 70% of regulations but he wants to regulate the media so they can't say bad things about him and he can sue them at his whim.

He wants to do away with a free press, which is guaranteed by the first amendment, by imposing regulations on it.

Bat-shittery in action.

 

[Andylusion]

Well regardless of what you claim... the fact is regulations have done more to do exactly what you claim they were created to contain.

Regulations concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few, because the many can't afford to meet those regulations, and thus are unable to compete with the few.

Sure the wealthy will always be reaching for more. If you could not profit from doing something... you wouldn't do it. Same with the rich. No rich person spends millions to invest in a project they know will lose money. You wouldn't either.

But what regulations do, is keep YOU and ME and the average citizen from being able to reach for more ourselves. Now only the wealthy can reach for more, because they are the only ones with the financial ability to meet those regulations. You and me.... we go broke, can't compete.

Regulations always benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor. Yeah, trying to prevent that may have been the argument for making those regulations, but this is the practical result regardless of intentions.

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

Right, and every person wants to believe that regulations is what did that.

If you want to believe in myths, that's fine. But it's not the truth.

Before regulations existed, working conditions were improving. Before the EPA ever existed, pollution was decreasing.

The left-wing likes to pretend that regulations are the only reason we have clean water. This is entirely false.

The left-wing likes to pretend the only reason we have a safe place to work, is because of regulations. That is entirely false.

I can cite hundreds of examples. The very first big work place safety push, was in the rail road industry, when the rail companies started installing air brakes on cargo trains to reduce accidents and injuries. It wasn't because of government, or any regulations. It was business making that push, and it always has been.

It wasn't government that improved the safety standards on cars. It was car companies. If car companies had never created an air bag system, the government would never have required them to be installed.

Regulations only make it more costly for people to buy the products they need or want. They never make the products they buy better. The companies making the products do that.

You're a blithering idiot. You really believe child labor laws were not needed, or that factories stopped spewing their polluted crap without laws to require that? You're an idiot.

Screaming and yelling, doesn't make your point more or less valid.

Now unfortunately I don't have as much time as I like to respond to this one, because this is actually one of my favorite topics.

First, who pushed for the first child labor laws? Do you? Was it the public, and parents? Nope.

Who pushed for it? It was the mega corporations and the Unions of those corporations.

And they were not pushing for labor laws, because they cared about the welfare of the children, nor the welfare of the families they were supporting.

Nope... They were simply.... greedy. See, the small businesses were competing with the mega-corps and the Unions, by under cutting them on price by using cheaper labor.

Sure enough, after the child labor laws of Mass. and Penn, both forced out the cheap competition. The big Unions got richer. The mega-corps got richer. The poor families struggling to survive, got poorer.

Once again, even the best regulations you have, still make my point.

Now you can argue that those regulations are needed. And you might even have a good case for it. I'll concede that. I will.

However, my point that regulations benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor... remains true, even if you have a good case for your regulations.

My own experience in regulations has been negative. When I was a Freshman in high school, I got a job. But because I was under age, they only let me work 3 hours a day 5 days a week. Which of course is like earning nothing.

I had to do odd jobs off the books, to earn more money, which meant I had to work harder to earn less. Thanks a ton.

 

[Andylusion]

Sadly, americans by and large are clueless as to the labor, environmental, and property rights struggles history of this land mass. Regulations arose to constrain the feudalistic urges of concentrated power and wealth, but of course, concentrated power and wealth will always be reaching for more. The masses have been very well programmed to distrust govt, over which they at least have the pretense of the vote for representation, so they turn to concentrated corporate power for refuge and salvation, a framework within which they have no say at all. It is a form of human sacrifice.

Well regardless of what you claim... the fact is regulations have done more to do exactly what you claim they were created to contain.

Regulations concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few, because the many can't afford to meet those regulations, and thus are unable to compete with the few.

Sure the wealthy will always be reaching for more. If you could not profit from doing something... you wouldn't do it. Same with the rich. No rich person spends millions to invest in a project they know will lose money. You wouldn't either.

But what regulations do, is keep YOU and ME and the average citizen from being able to reach for more ourselves. Now only the wealthy can reach for more, because they are the only ones with the financial ability to meet those regulations. You and me.... we go broke, can't compete.

Regulations always benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor. Yeah, trying to prevent that may have been the argument for making those regulations, but this is the practical result regardless of intentions.

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

 

[BULLDOG]

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

Right, and every person wants to believe that regulations is what did that.

If you want to believe in myths, that's fine. But it's not the truth.

Before regulations existed, working conditions were improving. Before the EPA ever existed, pollution was decreasing.

The left-wing likes to pretend that regulations are the only reason we have clean water. This is entirely false.

The left-wing likes to pretend the only reason we have a safe place to work, is because of regulations. That is entirely false.

I can cite hundreds of examples. The very first big work place safety push, was in the rail road industry, when the rail companies started installing air brakes on cargo trains to reduce accidents and injuries. It wasn't because of government, or any regulations. It was business making that push, and it always has been.

It wasn't government that improved the safety standards on cars. It was car companies. If car companies had never created an air bag system, the government would never have required them to be installed.

Regulations only make it more costly for people to buy the products they need or want. They never make the products they buy better. The companies making the products do that.

You're a blithering idiot. You really believe child labor laws were not needed, or that factories stopped spewing their polluted crap without laws to require that? You're an idiot.

Screaming and yelling, doesn't make your point more or less valid.

Now unfortunately I don't have as much time as I like to respond to this one, because this is actually one of my favorite topics.

First, who pushed for the first child labor laws? Do you? Was it the public, and parents? Nope.

Who pushed for it? It was the mega corporations and the Unions of those corporations.

And they were not pushing for labor laws, because they cared about the welfare of the children, nor the welfare of the families they were supporting.

Nope... They were simply.... greedy. See, the small businesses were competing with the mega-corps and the Unions, by under cutting them on price by using cheaper labor.

Sure enough, after the child labor laws of Mass. and Penn, both forced out the cheap competition. The big Unions got richer. The mega-corps got richer. The poor families struggling to survive, got poorer.

Once again, even the best regulations you have, still make my point.

Now you can argue that those regulations are needed. And you might even have a good case for it. I'll concede that. I will.

However, my point that regulations benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor... remains true, even if you have a good case for your regulations.

My own experience in regulations has been negative. When I was a Freshman in high school, I got a job. But because I was under age, they only let me work 3 hours a day 5 days a week. Which of course is like earning nothing.

I had to do odd jobs off the books, to earn more money, which meant I had to work harder to earn less. Thanks a ton.

You really need to research the relationship of unions and corporations during that time. Your claims have no relationship with reality.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Well regardless of what you claim... the fact is regulations have done more to do exactly what you claim they were created to contain.

Regulations concentrate power and wealth in the hands of the few, because the many can't afford to meet those regulations, and thus are unable to compete with the few.

Sure the wealthy will always be reaching for more. If you could not profit from doing something... you wouldn't do it. Same with the rich. No rich person spends millions to invest in a project they know will lose money. You wouldn't either.

But what regulations do, is keep YOU and ME and the average citizen from being able to reach for more ourselves. Now only the wealthy can reach for more, because they are the only ones with the financial ability to meet those regulations. You and me.... we go broke, can't compete.

Regulations always benefit the wealthy, at the expense of the poor. Yeah, trying to prevent that may have been the argument for making those regulations, but this is the practical result regardless of intentions.

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

 

[Andylusion]

So you think our goal should be to see how poorly we can do things? Odd that the right is willing to give up clean air and water, but still insists that PP can't exist if the halls of their buildings aren't 12 feet wide.

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

 

[Fenton Lum]

I'm simply saying what is true. What you conclude from the truth, is your deal.

But the truth, is the truth, whether you agree with it or not. Whether you support is or not.

If you support endless regulations, then you support harming the poor, for the benefit of the rich. That's how it is.

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

 

[Andylusion]

I kinda like clean air and water, and before retirement, I was glad to have a safe place to work. Sad that you don't see those things as helping the poor.

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Yeah? Which society would that be? Greece? Venezuela? Perhaps France?

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
Is France's envied health care system threatened?
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost
France in a state of economic emergency: Hollande

The system is going broke, and doctors are on strike, and taxes are up so high, the economy is faltering, cost are out of control, and the entire country is in an economic emergency, with unemployment at 10.5%.

That's your system at it's best.

Let me put it another way.... my parents church has an outreach program where they go to National Children's Hospital here in Columbus Ohio. My mother found this couple with their child, who had some strange illness. In their country in Europe, they were told, take your child home and enjoy the few moments you have left.

Basically, go home and die. Free health care. Totally free. This is what you call "resolved with much more successful results for "the people"?

Really? That's your idea of "for the people"?

They mortgaged their home, flew to the US, and they are paying to have doctors heal their child. He is expected to make a full recovery. Which system, your left-wing socialist free-care system, or the pay-for-service capitalist system, did more for "the people" here?

You say that's an isolated incident?

My son will die if he comes home from US - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Another parent told to take their child home to die.
Here in Cleveland paying for treatment that will save his life. Perhaps that's anecdotal.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

The number of Canadians who choose to pay out of pocket for health care in the US, instead of getting 'free' health care in Canada increased 25%... and that's just those coming to the US, not including those going to other countries to pay for health care.

This when supposedly Canada ranked higher in health care, than the US.

Due tell... please explain why people in a system that is supposedly "for the people" and free, are choosing to borrow money against their homes, to come to the US and pay for health care that I guess is not "for the people"? Please give us your insight on this.

The UK system is in distress. Doctor strikes, funding problems. The list goes on and on.

And we haven't even gotten to the fact that in nearly every comparison, you have a better chance of being treated and cured in the US, than any of these other countries.


But by all means. Which country would YOU point to, as having the superior health care system?

 

[Fenton Lum]

That is just the parroting of corporate power consolidation and capital concentration agenda talking points.

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Yeah? Which society would that be? Greece? Venezuela? Perhaps France?

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
Is France's envied health care system threatened?
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost
France in a state of economic emergency: Hollande

The system is going broke, and doctors are on strike, and taxes are up so high, the economy is faltering, cost are out of control, and the entire country is in an economic emergency, with unemployment at 10.5%.

That's your system at it's best.

Let me put it another way.... my parents church has an outreach program where they go to National Children's Hospital here in Columbus Ohio. My mother found this couple with their child, who had some strange illness. In their country in Europe, they were told, take your child home and enjoy the few moments you have left.

Basically, go home and die. Free health care. Totally free. This is what you call "resolved with much more successful results for "the people"?

Really? That's your idea of "for the people"?

They mortgaged their home, flew to the US, and they are paying to have doctors heal their child. He is expected to make a full recovery. Which system, your left-wing socialist free-care system, or the pay-for-service capitalist system, did more for "the people" here?

You say that's an isolated incident?

My son will die if he comes home from US - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Another parent told to take their child home to die.
Here in Cleveland paying for treatment that will save his life. Perhaps that's anecdotal.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

The number of Canadians who choose to pay out of pocket for health care in the US, instead of getting 'free' health care in Canada increased 25%... and that's just those coming to the US, not including those going to other countries to pay for health care.

This when supposedly Canada ranked higher in health care, than the US.

Due tell... please explain why people in a system that is supposedly "for the people" and free, are choosing to borrow money against their homes, to come to the US and pay for health care that I guess is not "for the people"? Please give us your insight on this.

The UK system is in distress. Doctor strikes, funding problems. The list goes on and on.

And we haven't even gotten to the fact that in nearly every comparison, you have a better chance of being treated and cured in the US, than any of these other countries.


But by all means. Which country would YOU point to, as having the superior health care system?

I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to. If you think you know all you need to about this, nevermind. If you're the curious type, you'll dig deeper for yourself rather than post corporate power links to "information". You people hate the media unless they tell you what you want to hear, then it's gospel.

 

[Andylusion]

Is it wrong? What has happened since the ObamaCare regulations have been put in place? More insurance companies have left the market. Leaving the mega-insurance companies to charge higher prices, and make bigger profits.

Same is true of auto-regulations, banking regulations, pretty much every regulation scheme created.

Name one set of regulations anywhere, that didn't result in mega-corps getting richer, and competition shut out of the market?

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Yeah? Which society would that be? Greece? Venezuela? Perhaps France?

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
Is France's envied health care system threatened?
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost
France in a state of economic emergency: Hollande

The system is going broke, and doctors are on strike, and taxes are up so high, the economy is faltering, cost are out of control, and the entire country is in an economic emergency, with unemployment at 10.5%.

That's your system at it's best.

Let me put it another way.... my parents church has an outreach program where they go to National Children's Hospital here in Columbus Ohio. My mother found this couple with their child, who had some strange illness. In their country in Europe, they were told, take your child home and enjoy the few moments you have left.

Basically, go home and die. Free health care. Totally free. This is what you call "resolved with much more successful results for "the people"?

Really? That's your idea of "for the people"?

They mortgaged their home, flew to the US, and they are paying to have doctors heal their child. He is expected to make a full recovery. Which system, your left-wing socialist free-care system, or the pay-for-service capitalist system, did more for "the people" here?

You say that's an isolated incident?

My son will die if he comes home from US - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Another parent told to take their child home to die.
Here in Cleveland paying for treatment that will save his life. Perhaps that's anecdotal.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

The number of Canadians who choose to pay out of pocket for health care in the US, instead of getting 'free' health care in Canada increased 25%... and that's just those coming to the US, not including those going to other countries to pay for health care.

This when supposedly Canada ranked higher in health care, than the US.

Due tell... please explain why people in a system that is supposedly "for the people" and free, are choosing to borrow money against their homes, to come to the US and pay for health care that I guess is not "for the people"? Please give us your insight on this.

The UK system is in distress. Doctor strikes, funding problems. The list goes on and on.

And we haven't even gotten to the fact that in nearly every comparison, you have a better chance of being treated and cured in the US, than any of these other countries.


But by all means. Which country would YOU point to, as having the superior health care system?

I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to. If you think you know all you need to about this, nevermind. If you're the curious type, you'll dig deeper for yourself rather than post corporate power links to "information". You people hate the media unless they tell you what you want to hear, then it's gospel.

I'm the curious type, and I have dug deeper for myself.
Let me show you a screen shot of my computer screen.....

You see all those links? They go to reports, pdfs, news papers, doctor associations, and government agencies around the world. The list of links is 3 pages long. I no longer attempt to look for what I want, I have to use the search feature on my own list of links, to find what I want.

Each one details the every aspect of our system, and every other. They cover Norway to France, Spain to Sweden, UK to Japan, the US and Canada.

I have read each and every single one of those links, on the details of nearly every Single-payer, and Capitalist system in the world. This ranges from the government run hospitals in Singapore, to the Capitalist medical-tourism hospitals of India.

Maybe not be an "expert" on health care systems world wide, but I'm pretty close. I've been following healthcare issues since the late 1990s.

Now before you ever posted, I knew before asking what your answer was going to be.

"I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to."

You can't argue the facts, because I have the facts, and they don't support your argument. So like every left-winger I have ever talked to in my life, you immediately move to simply dismiss and ignore the facts.

Well that doesn't work for me Troll. You either put up, or shut up. You either provide evidence for your argument, or you are a troll that everyone should ignore. You people bark a ton, but you never have anything to bite with.

Make your choice. Either works for me.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Look, no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system; too many making too much on it as is. It is the most expensive healthcare system on the planet, with many other approaches exhibiting better health outcomes for their citizens. Furthermore, “ObamaCare” was a plan vomited up by the Heritage Foundation, then implemented by Romney in MA when he was governor, as a response to “HilaryCare”, so of course it didn’t protect or look out for the interests of the unsubstantial people, it was never meant to. Then the insurance industry and the pharma industry were invited in to help craft the final tradeoffs and details. All “Obamacare” was ever going to be once the single payer option was discarded was, a weak first step. We could have what others enjoy, they’ve done the pioneering work so all we would have to do in incorporate what works best and tweak it for here, but we have an “-ism” phobia tantamount to a religious belief system, thus we just say “no” to what’s been demonstrated to work better.

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Yeah? Which society would that be? Greece? Venezuela? Perhaps France?

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
Is France's envied health care system threatened?
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost
France in a state of economic emergency: Hollande

The system is going broke, and doctors are on strike, and taxes are up so high, the economy is faltering, cost are out of control, and the entire country is in an economic emergency, with unemployment at 10.5%.

That's your system at it's best.

Let me put it another way.... my parents church has an outreach program where they go to National Children's Hospital here in Columbus Ohio. My mother found this couple with their child, who had some strange illness. In their country in Europe, they were told, take your child home and enjoy the few moments you have left.

Basically, go home and die. Free health care. Totally free. This is what you call "resolved with much more successful results for "the people"?

Really? That's your idea of "for the people"?

They mortgaged their home, flew to the US, and they are paying to have doctors heal their child. He is expected to make a full recovery. Which system, your left-wing socialist free-care system, or the pay-for-service capitalist system, did more for "the people" here?

You say that's an isolated incident?

My son will die if he comes home from US - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Another parent told to take their child home to die.
Here in Cleveland paying for treatment that will save his life. Perhaps that's anecdotal.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

The number of Canadians who choose to pay out of pocket for health care in the US, instead of getting 'free' health care in Canada increased 25%... and that's just those coming to the US, not including those going to other countries to pay for health care.

This when supposedly Canada ranked higher in health care, than the US.

Due tell... please explain why people in a system that is supposedly "for the people" and free, are choosing to borrow money against their homes, to come to the US and pay for health care that I guess is not "for the people"? Please give us your insight on this.

The UK system is in distress. Doctor strikes, funding problems. The list goes on and on.

And we haven't even gotten to the fact that in nearly every comparison, you have a better chance of being treated and cured in the US, than any of these other countries.


But by all means. Which country would YOU point to, as having the superior health care system?

I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to. If you think you know all you need to about this, nevermind. If you're the curious type, you'll dig deeper for yourself rather than post corporate power links to "information". You people hate the media unless they tell you what you want to hear, then it's gospel.

I'm the curious type, and I have dug deeper for myself.
Let me show you a screen shot of my computer screen.....

View attachment 95468

You see all those links? They go to reports, pdfs, news papers, doctor associations, and government agencies around the world. The list of links is 3 pages long. I no longer attempt to look for what I want, I have to use the search feature on my own list of links, to find what I want.

Each one details the every aspect of our system, and every other. They cover Norway to France, Spain to Sweden, UK to Japan, the US and Canada.

I have read each and every single one of those links, on the details of nearly every Single-payer, and Capitalist system in the world. This ranges from the government run hospitals in Singapore, to the Capitalist medical-tourism hospitals of India.

Maybe not be an "expert" on health care systems world wide, but I'm pretty close. I've been following healthcare issues since the late 1990s.

Now before you ever posted, I knew before asking what your answer was going to be.

"I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to."

You can't argue the facts, because I have the facts, and they don't support your argument. So like every left-winger I have ever talked to in my life, you immediately move to simply dismiss and ignore the facts.

Well that doesn't work for me Troll. You either put up, or shut up. You either provide evidence for your argument, or you are a troll that everyone should ignore. You people bark a ton, but you never have anything to bite with.

Make your choice. Either works for me.

I'm very impressed with your screen capture savvy. And I fully expect you to ignore any and all who do not agree with you. And I do not. So sure, I must be "left".

 

[Andylusion]

The origins are not relevant. Yes, the Heritage Foundation years ago proposed mandated health insurance.

That does not address anything I said, nor relevant to the discussion.

The problem is, no matter what happens, no matter who comes up with the regulations, you find some excuse.

Every time we implement every regulations you people want, it doesn't work. It never works. It won't ever work.

But instead of saying "hey regulation isn't the solution" you jump to "no one really wants to fix what's wrong with our healthcare system" and all these conspiracy theories.

You created all these regulations, it has devastating effects, and then you do this co-out routine that "oh well, the reason it didn't work is because lobbying, and big corporations, and it wasn't designed to work".

No, you are wrong.

The reason it didn't work, is because regulation never solves anything ever. Never has. Never will.

Name one example where it has worked? No such example exists. No matter how many times your 'regulation' fix, causes problems and fails to solve anything, you'll simply find someone to blame.

Just like every left-wing group the world over.

Cuba: "It's the US fault!"
Venezuela: "It's a capitalist sabotage"
Soviets: "It's the fault of the bourgeoisie!"

Over and over, every time your system doesn't give you the results you want, instead of investigating the possibility that your attempt to force the results you want at the point of a gun, could be the problem, you simply blame shift to something else "It was the heritage foundations fault!"

No. The solution to health care, is free-market capitalism. The ruination of health care, is more socialist government regulations that has never worked in all history, and will not work today either.

Or you could look at other societies where this healthcare issue has been resolved with much more successful results for "the people". If all you can see is "left-wing" versus whatever else you think is righteous, all you will ever see is two boxes everything must fit into. You and I simply do not share that approach, it is frozen in time, and has never operated in the manner you have bought into. I’m aware of the illusion you want me to believe in, I just don’t, that’s all. What I see in america is this:

Privatized gains versus socialized losses for the Wall Street/bankster class
Internalized profit versus externalized risk and expense for the “job creator” class
Socialism for the aristocracy versus laissez-faire capitalism for the masses

Yeah? Which society would that be? Greece? Venezuela? Perhaps France?

France's Health-Care System Is Going Broke
Is France's envied health care system threatened?
France Fights Universal Care's High Cost
France in a state of economic emergency: Hollande

The system is going broke, and doctors are on strike, and taxes are up so high, the economy is faltering, cost are out of control, and the entire country is in an economic emergency, with unemployment at 10.5%.

That's your system at it's best.

Let me put it another way.... my parents church has an outreach program where they go to National Children's Hospital here in Columbus Ohio. My mother found this couple with their child, who had some strange illness. In their country in Europe, they were told, take your child home and enjoy the few moments you have left.

Basically, go home and die. Free health care. Totally free. This is what you call "resolved with much more successful results for "the people"?

Really? That's your idea of "for the people"?

They mortgaged their home, flew to the US, and they are paying to have doctors heal their child. He is expected to make a full recovery. Which system, your left-wing socialist free-care system, or the pay-for-service capitalist system, did more for "the people" here?

You say that's an isolated incident?

My son will die if he comes home from US - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Another parent told to take their child home to die.
Here in Cleveland paying for treatment that will save his life. Perhaps that's anecdotal.

http://www.usnews.com/news/best-cou...dians-increasingly-come-to-us-for-health-care

The number of Canadians who choose to pay out of pocket for health care in the US, instead of getting 'free' health care in Canada increased 25%... and that's just those coming to the US, not including those going to other countries to pay for health care.

This when supposedly Canada ranked higher in health care, than the US.

Due tell... please explain why people in a system that is supposedly "for the people" and free, are choosing to borrow money against their homes, to come to the US and pay for health care that I guess is not "for the people"? Please give us your insight on this.

The UK system is in distress. Doctor strikes, funding problems. The list goes on and on.

And we haven't even gotten to the fact that in nearly every comparison, you have a better chance of being treated and cured in the US, than any of these other countries.


But by all means. Which country would YOU point to, as having the superior health care system?

I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to. If you think you know all you need to about this, nevermind. If you're the curious type, you'll dig deeper for yourself rather than post corporate power links to "information". You people hate the media unless they tell you what you want to hear, then it's gospel.

I'm the curious type, and I have dug deeper for myself.
Let me show you a screen shot of my computer screen.....

View attachment 95468

You see all those links? They go to reports, pdfs, news papers, doctor associations, and government agencies around the world. The list of links is 3 pages long. I no longer attempt to look for what I want, I have to use the search feature on my own list of links, to find what I want.

Each one details the every aspect of our system, and every other. They cover Norway to France, Spain to Sweden, UK to Japan, the US and Canada.

I have read each and every single one of those links, on the details of nearly every Single-payer, and Capitalist system in the world. This ranges from the government run hospitals in Singapore, to the Capitalist medical-tourism hospitals of India.

Maybe not be an "expert" on health care systems world wide, but I'm pretty close. I've been following healthcare issues since the late 1990s.

Now before you ever posted, I knew before asking what your answer was going to be.

"I have no doubt we can all go find links that say whatever anyone wants them to."

You can't argue the facts, because I have the facts, and they don't support your argument. So like every left-winger I have ever talked to in my life, you immediately move to simply dismiss and ignore the facts.

Well that doesn't work for me Troll. You either put up, or shut up. You either provide evidence for your argument, or you are a troll that everyone should ignore. You people bark a ton, but you never have anything to bite with.

Make your choice. Either works for me.

I'm very impressed with your screen capture savvy. And I fully expect you to ignore any and all who do not agree with you. And I do not. So sure, I must be "left".

You haven't given me anything to ignore. You have made some claims, that I have successfully proven false with facts.

Further, if it was my intention to simply ignore people generally, I would not have spent so much time researching every aspect of the issue, and recording links to all of the data to share.

If anyone is ignoring, it would be you ignoring the information I have posted.

Lastly, regardless of anything else we discuss... left-wing is left-wing. Any ideology that proposes greater government control, is a left-wing proposal.

You might be right-wing about everything else, which would be unlikely, but on this issue, the issue we're discussing, you are left-wing.

You complaining about being called left-wing, when you are pushing a left-wing ideology, is like a person who never eats meat, complaining about being called a vegetarian. You are what you are. Get over it.

 

[idb]

I'm sure his figure of 70% is carefully researched.
He'll be able to list every regulation he wants to get rid of...I have no doubt...believe me.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm sure his figure of 70% is carefully researched.
He'll be able to list every regulation he wants to get rid of...I have no doubt...believe me.

of course not. so what.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

See Next Page.