US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7602

On May 22 2017 12:00 Plansix wrote:
Prepare for Israel, where they will try to flatter him an pay his children money to get his favor. He is going to love going over seas, since everyone will praise him and try to get things from him.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates will donate a combined $100 million to a World Bank fund for women entrepreneurs that was the brainchild of Ivanka Trump.

.....

The World Bank fund, which provides technical help and investment funding for women business owners, differs from the Clinton Foundation in some significant ways. While Ivanka Trump proposed the idea along with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, she is not involved with its operation.

On May 22 2017 12:57 LegalLord wrote:

Kind of depends on the country. Those who have political costs to pay for sucking up to an egomaniac will probably not so easily do this.

On May 22 2017 11:47 Doodsmack wrote:
This admin stinks to high heaven.

https://twitter.com/GeorgeTakei/status/866298603182194688

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/866302244957958148

https://twitter.com/20committee/status/866314135629385728

On May 22 2017 09:07 crms wrote:

That's highly debatable. I know the US is the worst developed nation to have a baby with maternal death rates worse than some 3rd world countries. And while we do have some stellar healthcare professionals, what's it matter if the vast majority of the citizens can't get that level of treatment? As a middle class person, I don't really care that the USA has some of the best doctors if myself and nobody I know can utilize their services. The level of care for the average person is simply better in nearly any developed country. We should be analyzing the system based on the accessibility of most, not outliers.

On May 22 2017 17:49 Acrofales wrote:

Not only that, but where the absolute superstar care is located is absolutely irrelevant. It's not available to anybody except the ultrarich, and they will happily travel halfway across the globe for that care.

On May 22 2017 17:55 Simberto wrote:


It is kind of good for the nation as it provides some tax dollars on the procedures for the ultra rich, and keeps the ultra rich in the country where they spend some more money that at least partially ends up in the local economy.

But that should definitively not be the main goal of a healthcare system for the grand population. That should take a look at median results, or total result stats, or something like that. All of which are things in which the US lags behind other first world countries, while paying a lot more.

On May 22 2017 18:12 Slydie wrote:


I believe there is no easy way out of your mess, especially since US citezens believe they NEED health insurance, and can not rely on free public service. They even buy insurance when they move to Europe. Maybe something like this:

-Make it very easy to swich health-insurance
-Slowly start taxing health insurance.
-Slowly build up free healthcare.
-Make the government the main buyer of pharmaseuticals, negotiating prices nationwide, figthing to keep them LOW.
-Slowly introduce a state "health insurance" that covers all necessary treatment for all citezens.
-Slowly scale back the insurance industry.
-Make it difficult for private hospitals to waste money on administration and over-staffing and over-testing through regulations.