monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Trump and Putin

Any of those countries have the size, population and history as the US?

Yup, it's a pretty straight line from Otto von Bismarck's Health Insurance Bill of 1883 to the Holocaust. Isn't it, McGentrix?

Joseph Stiglitz ‏@stiglitzian 2h2 hours ago
Stiglitz: "In the UK, for example, 10% of profits were returned to shareholders in 1970; this figure is now 70%."

Joseph Stiglitz ‏@stiglitzian 2h2 hours ago
Stiglitz: "Top executives in large US corporations now take home around 300 times what the same corporation's median worker receives."

since you're opposed to universal healthcare at the state level, too.

It seems that arguments about population size and ethnic diversity are really only a distraction for a general rejection of the concept of universal healthcare.

Damn it CI. Go back and read some of his posts. He is always putting someone down but nicely. He also lies by posting things he knows are untrue and posting parts of a post that make one look like a lair.

You're most certainly not the only one.

Just don't tell georgeob1. He'll throw a hissy fit if you characterize a sizeable portion of Trump supporters as "undereducated."

Blame Trump’s Victory on College-Educated Whites, Not the Working Class

The average Trump voter is not poorly educated or unemployed, nor does he live in a rural area. Back in May, FiveThirtyEight’s Nate Silver punctured the myth of the “working class” being Trump’s voter base: In exit polls of 23 states from the primaries, all showed a higher median income for Trump supporters than the national average, usually around $70,000....The voters Clinton really lost—the ones she was targeting and relying on for victory—were college-educated whites. Most polling suggested she would win these voters, but she didn’t, according to exit polls.

Perhaps, then, these Trump voters are the most deplorable of them all. They’re not suffering or desperate, and have no concrete reason to hate the status quo or to feel like they are in decline. They understand that Trump is manifestly unprepared to be president, have heard his many lies and insults, yet voted for him anyway. And without them, Trump wouldn’t have won.

I could agrue that, but that wold imply that I support Universal Healthcare, which I don't.

The US would have to cover 350 million, maybe less if we leave out the illegal immigrants, people and that isn't feasible without a huge increase in taxes.

That's a pretty tired argument. The European Union has a population of 510 million people, with significant diversity of major ethnic groups as well as indigenous and non-indigenous minorities - yet universal health care exists in every member nation, with the common market and the Schengen Area providing additional options for cross border health care within the EU borders.

You could argue that a system of universal healthcare might work better on a per-state basis, but that's not the argument you're making, since you're opposed to universal healthcare at the state level, too.

It seems that arguments about population size and ethnic diversity are really only a distraction for a general rejection of the concept of universal healthcare.

In The Field of Fight, coauthored with Michael Ledeen, Flynn asserts that the United States is facing an “international alliance of evil countries and movements that is working to destroy us.” This “working coalition,” centered on Iran, also includes North Korea, China, Russia, Syria, Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela, and Nicaragua. Cooperation among these countries derives from the shared hatred of the United States, which “binds together jihadis, Communists, and garden-variety tyrants.” No evidence is offered in support of this bizarre fantasy.

The United States must “energize every element of national power in a cohesive synchronized manner—similar to the effort during World War II” to fight this new “global war.” The radical Islamists, Flynn writes, “think they’re winning, and so do I.” Things are so dire, in fact, that “I’m totally convinced that, without a proper sense of urgency, we will be eventually defeated, dominated, and very likely destroyed.” So far, “our leaders in Washington, from the White House to the Pentagon to our major military headquarters, have proven they aren’t up to” fighting this war.

Iran is at the heart of Flynn’s fevered vision. The strictly limited, multilateral nuclear agreement signed in 2015 has been criticized by some for not going beyond the nuclear issue. Flynn and Ledeen transform it into a full-scale “strategic embrace of the Islamic Republic” by the United States. Focusing on the nuclear issue is, in any case, a mistake since, they argue, the goal of US policy should be regime change. Instead of invading Iraq in 2003, “our primary target should have been Tehran,…and the method should have been political—support of the internal Iranian opposition.” That this could have brought down the deeply entrenched Iranian government is another pure fantasy. But “we should at least consider how to change Iran from within, remembering that such methods brought down the Soviet Empire.” (They didn’t.)

What's the point you're trying to make, McGentrix?

That you'll reject any approach to solving problems in the healthcare system if it's modeled on an approach that exists anywhere else on the planet, because it's not "All American?"

Sounds a lot like Not Invented Here Syndrome.

The point is that the US will do things the way the US does things. We won't emulate Europe or any country in Europe. We won't do the things that others "feel" we should.