The General American Politics Thread

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

His campaign manager said it was untrue.

Also I read Trump's website on his policies. As a conservative I stand by the plan especially when it comes to economics, however I do want to ask why Mexico should pay for the wall if the US is gonna build it?

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

Why should Mexico build such a wall? They shouldn't.

They're not the ones ranting about keeping out the immigrants bringing drugs, rapists, and other sorts of crime. And they're not the ones who even want such a thing built in the first place. Never mind how incredibly stupid the idea is when all that money being wasted to engineer such a thing can actually be used on something far more productive, like funding alternative energy sources and rebuilding infrastructure that's falling apart.

Building a wall to separate the US and Mexico is just another way of making a so-called Mexican Exclusion Act of 20XX like the US did with the Chinese back in 1882.

[Tani Coyote]

Never mind the immigration issue is quite hilariously the result of the Republican Party trying to stop immigration.

Oh shit, what's that? Allow me to explain.

For most of history since we took over the West since 1848, people from Mexico (and all of Latin America really) were free to come and go. Border control was very lax, and the general rule was that so long as you weren't causing problems (or there wasn't an economic downturn that made white Americans suddenly want jobs foreigners filled), you wouldn't be harassed by federal authorities. Never mind, the Mexican people in particular had been used to going across what is now the border, and drawing an imaginary line across what was once their land didn't stop that.

Then later in the 20th century, immigration became more and more of a hot button issue. I assume this is because of the vastly increased settlement of the Southwest after World War II, which logically would have caused competition for resources.

Cue the federal government vastly increasing the size of the Border Patrol, sponsoring deportation and... granting amnesty to people who were already here? Giving them the ability to sponsor their families outside the country for entry...?

This is where the whole idea backfired spectacularly. It was now extremely dangerous to cross the border, when historically it had been little more than a stroll. Then you have people back home often having to get in touch with loan sharks to pay for the journey. With the huge financial and personal risks in mind, it was no longer a case of "if you kick me out, I can just walk right back in" as it was historically. Those who crossed the border illegally now had an interest in staying here (since they risked dying or otherwise failing to get back in if they left)... especially given they could wait for another amnesty bill which would grant them legal status that could be used to bring their families over.

In short, the GOP's immigration policy had the ironic side effect of creating a large, permanent community of Mexican and Latino Americans, when historically these groups had been migratory (rather like the Chinese). For a Party that has its modern roots in white supremacy, the GOP sure did an excellent job of setting the stage for a far more racially diverse America. Maybe Trump isn't the first Democratic plant after all?

[Meta77]

When people say minorities please try to not assume the entire minority race is included. People always tell me if your black you can not like trump...........and i like the man.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

5 minutes ago, Meta77 said:

When people say minorities please try to not assume the entire minority race is included. People always tell me if your black you can not like trump...........and i like the man.

No one here is saying that you cannot be black and like Trump. As far as everyone is concerned you have every right to support who you want. I have expressed interest in Trump here and no one has no issues with it. 

[Meta77]

1 minute ago, Mikyeong said:

No one here is saying that you cannot be black and like Trump. As far as everyone is concerned you have every right to support who you want. I have expressed interest in Trump here and no one has no issues with it. 

I know lol its just the wording sometimes when people use it makes it seem as no one in a minority likes him. But im to laid back to really get upset over politics. I just like to talk.

[Tani Coyote]

A member of a minority group can like Trump, it just doesn't make sense from an objective point of view given what he is proposing. It's sort of like how perplexing it is that some gay people will support Trump when he is proposing overturning the gay marriage decision, to say nothing of conversion therapy and the rest of crazy crap coming out of the RNC right now. Yes, you can like some of the man's ideas, certainly, but it seems peculiar to support him and his Party if he doesn't have respect for you as a human being.

If one is able to say that there's more to you than your minority identity, that's true, but at the same time, it indicates your experience is probably not representative of the rest of the minority group's (compare universality vs identity politics; if you can back universality, chances are high you have a privileged position relative to others). Some black people are absolutely able to get through life with minimal experience with racism, either because they got the luck of the draw and ran into very progressive folks, or happen to have privilege in other areas (e.g. wealth) that balances out the effects; we saw this in action in how many black men are dressing up on purpose to reduce the risk of being profiled.

All that being said, most black people will not be that fortunate. Same goes for other minority groups, but it goes without saying blacks get the worst of it.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

23 minutes ago, Meta77 said:

I know lol its just the wording sometimes when people use it makes it seem as no one in a minority likes him. But im to laid back to really get upset over politics. I just like to talk.

Most people in the minority don't like him, true but it doesn't mean NO minority likes him. Trump has a huge Asian-American fanclub. He has a lot of women behind him and he has blacks behind him to. There are many of these people that are conservatives as well. I know blackness gets policed even politically but you should stand behind he candidate you feel is going to support you. It's not about race.

[Tani Coyote]

18 minutes ago, Mikyeong said:

Most people in the minority don't like him, true but it doesn't mean NO minority likes him. Trump has a huge Asian-American fanclub. He has a lot of women behind him and he has blacks behind him to. There are many of these people that are conservatives as well. I know blackness gets policed even politically but you should stand behind he candidate you feel is going to support you. It's not about race.

It's strange you mention that.

A lot of blacks are fairly conservative people. They are the most family-oriented racial group there is, despite the horsecrap that elites (black and white) like to repeat. Many have deep religious convictions (just look at what Malcolm X and MLK Jr. both had in common - they were religious leaders). Consider the enormous difficulty black homosexuals have historically had to assert their identity; white homosexuals refused them, and the black community preferred to be homophobic as part of respectability politics as well as its own conservative leanings. The list goes on.

So why are they Democrats rather than Republicans overall?

Because the Democrats actually respect minority rights. Blacks left the Republican Party in droves after Nixon courted the segregationists. Blacks who don't enjoy class privilege have a fond memory of what the terms "states' rights," "voter fraud," etc. really mean and what many of their advocates really want. Because these were the same ideas peddled by the racists who ran the South before and after the Civil War, and in many cases continue to run it. Kind of puts the Republican Party's colorblind arguments into perspective, doesn't it?

Honestly, the GOP could probably win a significant chunk of the black vote if they embraced Civil Rights the same way the Democrats do now. Blacks don't vote Democrat "because they want a government check," as many Republican whites aren't afraid to suggest despite claims of not being racist. They vote Democrat because the Democrats' policies are ultimately better for their lives and health.

Sames goes for Hispanics as well. Many of them are Catholic. The Catholic Church has gradually embraced fiscal liberalism, but it's no secret that social conservatism remains a big part of Catholic life. The GOP could capture the Hispanic vote as well if it pushed for more racial Civil Rights and moved a little left on economic issues.

[WakanoBaka]

From what I've seen of Trump and people who hate him....

 

They seem to be in fear of the man's honesty. Trump is an honest man true to how he feels. You can't deny that, whether what he feels is wrong or right. It doesn't even seem like people hate him for his views, they seem to hate him cause he reminds people that they are still people, and that everybody is a lil bit of a dick and a lil bit racist.

 

I mean if you had questions about the guys morals, you elected Bush twice for fucks sake. And Obama the second time, I honestly doubt people give a shit what people stand for.

 

You call Trump racist, you'd be a damn lair if you say you aren't even a lil racist yourself. You ever looked at someone of a different race and saw them as a different race? Congrats, you are the basic level of racist that everybody but children share.

 

Don't get me wrong, I still don't vote.

To quote an anime I saw once.

Quote

Curry with shit in it, or shit with curry.

In the end it's all curry and shit.

Peace out

[Tani Coyote]

1 hour ago, WakanoBaka said:

You call Trump racist, you'd be a damn lair if you say you aren't even a lil racist yourself. You ever looked at someone of a different race and saw them as a different race? Congrats, you are the basic level of racist that everybody but children share.

There is a STRONG difference between having a little racist sentiment (which is impossible to avoid given how the brain works) and proposing policies that are objectively racist.

At the end of World War II, America started to reconsider its racist policies a tad. Why? Because we spent several years fighting crazy fascists who built their whole platform on racism. As racist as the United States was, we were able to still say things like genocide were going too far.

Same principle here. Everyone has a little racism in them, this is true. That doesn't mean you can't critique Trump's far more destructive racism. It means you can recognize your own prejudices as well as his, and see that his are far worse in their effects.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

1 hour ago, WakanoBaka said:

From what I've seen of Trump and people who hate him....

 

They seem to be in fear of the man's honesty. Trump is an honest man true to how he feels. You can't deny that, whether what he feels is wrong or right. It doesn't even seem like people hate him for his views, they seem to hate him cause he reminds people that they are still people, and that everybody is a lil bit of a dick and a lil bit racist.

Either you're being facetious or you've completely missed what people's saying. But assuming it's the latter, then no offense, but you are deliberately blinding yourself why they actually hate him.

They couldn't give a damn how honest he is (actually, him being honest about he feels is a good thing to them given all the dishonesty that has been going on in politics, because he ends up proving their reasons why they don't like him), they hate him because his proposed ideas would actually hurt them in the long run while benefitting others at their expense. The kinda thing that makes a policy racist at it's core. They do hate him for his views - if you've actually heard why people hate him, they'll tell you that exact reason, and they've made it no secret.

He doesn't remind anyone that they're still people, he reminds everyone that racism is still a thing that needs to be dealt with in this country as it's rearing its ugly head again. Even if the guy doesn't think of himself as a racist and is completely wishwashy over what he wants to do, a large part of his support base says otherwise.

[Nepenthe]

2 hours ago, WakanoBaka said:

From what I've seen of Trump and people who hate him....

 

They seem to be in fear of the man's honesty. Trump is an honest man true to how he feels. You can't deny that, whether what he feels is wrong or right. It doesn't even seem like people hate him for his views, they seem to hate him cause he reminds people that they are still people, and that everybody is a lil bit of a dick and a lil bit racist.

If he's being honest, which I posted proof of in this thread already that he's actually not (srsly, I wish people would read these political threads before jumping in), then simply put he's an honest racist. That's actually great, because his defenders can't tap dance around it with disingenuous questions about how anyone can be "sure" he's racist, meaning it's that much easier for me to defend my decision to not vote for him.

Quote

I mean if you had questions about the guys morals, you elected Bush twice for fucks sake. And Obama the second time, I honestly doubt people give a shit what people stand for.

Bush nor Obama have anything to do with Trump. On top of that, I wasn't old enough to vote for Bush so his legacy isn't on my hands.

Quote

You call Trump racist, you'd be a damn lair if you say you aren't even a lil racist yourself. You ever looked at someone of a different race and saw them as a different race? Congrats, you are the basic level of racist that everybody but children share.

Your example is not one that proves bias. It proves people have working eyes. If anyone looks at me and doesn't say I'm black, we actually have a problem.

Quote

Don't get me wrong, I still don't vote.

To quote an anime I saw once.

In the end it's all curry and shit.

Peace out

So you're just here to play Devil's Advocate for arguments that have been debunked already.

[Candescence]

9 hours ago, Raccoonatic Ogilvie said:

Never mind the immigration issue is quite hilariously the result of the Republican Party trying to stop immigration.

Oh shit, what's that? Allow me to explain.

For most of history since we took over the West since 1848, people from Mexico (and all of Latin America really) were free to come and go. Border control was very lax, and the general rule was that so long as you weren't causing problems (or there wasn't an economic downturn that made white Americans suddenly want jobs foreigners filled), you wouldn't be harassed by federal authorities. Never mind, the Mexican people in particular had been used to going across what is now the border, and drawing an imaginary line across what was once their land didn't stop that.

Then later in the 20th century, immigration became more and more of a hot button issue. I assume this is because of the vastly increased settlement of the Southwest after World War II, which logically would have caused competition for resources.

Cue the federal government vastly increasing the size of the Border Patrol, sponsoring deportation and... granting amnesty to people who were already here? Giving them the ability to sponsor their families outside the country for entry...?

This is where the whole idea backfired spectacularly. It was now extremely dangerous to cross the border, when historically it had been little more than a stroll. Then you have people back home often having to get in touch with loan sharks to pay for the journey. With the huge financial and personal risks in mind, it was no longer a case of "if you kick me out, I can just walk right back in" as it was historically. Those who crossed the border illegally now had an interest in staying here (since they risked dying or otherwise failing to get back in if they left)... especially given they could wait for another amnesty bill which would grant them legal status that could be used to bring their families over.

In short, the GOP's immigration policy had the ironic side effect of creating a large, permanent community of Mexican and Latino Americans, when historically these groups had been migratory (rather like the Chinese). For a Party that has its modern roots in white supremacy, the GOP sure did an excellent job of setting the stage for a far more racially diverse America. Maybe Trump isn't the first Democratic plant after all?

Just to add onto the bold part, Mexico being such a dangerous and and corrupt nation also happens to be pretty much the USA's fault as well due to the war on drugs, started by Richard Nixon (who else but Nixon~?). A policy that is a spectacular failure, though it was a firmly bipartisan policy until relatively recently. I imagine much of the Democratic party considers leniency on any drugs harder than marijuana to be political suicide, but the public mood is shifting towards the notion that the war on drugs simply isn't working, and more and more research leaning further towards that conclusion.

[Tani Coyote]

1 minute ago, Candescence said:

Just to add onto the bold part, Mexico being such a dangerous and and corrupt nation also happens to be pretty much the USA's fault as well due to the war on drugs, started by Richard Nixon (who else but Nixon~?). A policy that is a spectacular failure, though it was a firmly bipartisan policy until relatively recently. I imagine much of the Democratic party considers leniency on any drugs harder than marijuana to be political suicide, but the public mood is shifting towards the notion that the war on drugs simply isn't working, and more and more research leaning further towards that conclusion.

I think the "pretty much" part may be a bit too broad. The Drug War has certainly made things much worse than they were before (just notice how much the violence dipped once Felipe "Let's go to War with the Cartels what could possibly go wrong?" Calderon was out of office, indicating how bad these hardline policies are), but Mexico (like most of Latin America) has had to deal with corruption and violence pretty consistently since independence. Revolutions, dictators, abuse of power, voter fraud... it's insane.

It will help Mexico immensely once the War on Drugs dissipates though. It would remove one of many problems they've had to deal with and allow the country to get back on track. Never mind, it will cut into the immigration issue dramatically when people have less incentive to want to leave Mexico. Just imagine what all the money currently being spent on weapons both sides of the border could achieve if put to more productive use.

It's rather sad to think how much damage the GOP has done to not just America, but the world in the wake of Nixon's Southern strategy.

[Dizcrybe]

I'll throw in a bit of my own honesty and say that I do not understand how certain  people from minority group (including the LGBT community in this) can like Donald Trump. Like, do you realize the feeling's not mutual? Are you even listening to what he's saying? Or do you just not have any self-respect at all?

Open your eyes, y'all, the man does not like you; wake up. I mean, it's one thing to have opinions, but to admire a man who has openly expressed disdain for your people? Don't y'all have principles?

[Tani Coyote]

2 hours ago, Dizcrybe said:

I'll throw in a bit of my own honesty and say that I do not understand how certain  people from minority group (including the LGBT community in this) can like Donald Trump. Like, do you realize the feeling's not mutual? Are you even listening to what he's saying? Or do you just not have any self-respect at all?

Open your eyes, y'all, the man does not like you; wake up. I mean, it's one thing to have opinions, but to admire a man who has openly expressed disdain for your people? Don't y'all have principles?

I always chalked it up to some form of privilege. A person has been able to evade prejudice to such an extent that they are basically able to ignore the consequences of such policies.

I'm noticing a large trend that a lot of the minority folks who back guys like him happen to be doing relatively well financially or otherwise enjoy successful status. Much like many white men, these successful minority members use their experience as evidence that discrimination must not exist, or is easily overcome with enough hard work. Cue the eyeroll worthy tendency to use these same successful people as poster boys for how discrimination is all a left wing delusion.

Overall, it seems class does a good job of replacing other demographic identities. A middle class or rich black man tends to have fewer inhibitions voting for someone like Donald Trump than a poor one would, because their class status allows them to expect some sort of benefit. Understandably so, since it seems respectability politics works fantastic for those minority folks who are able to afford it (even if it's not entirely foolproof, as we see with Obama's experience... which I'm positive is NOT AT ALL motivated by his darker skin tone).

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

It isn't always about class but rather looking at the facts and chosing which candidate is for you.

[Dizcrybe]

4 minutes ago, Mikyeong said:

It isn't always about class but rather looking at the facts and chosing which candidate is for you.

You wanna talk about facts? How about the fact that Trump wants to screw you over? He's not for you, he's against you.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

3 hours ago, Mikyeong said:

It isn't always about class but rather looking at the facts and chosing which candidate is for you.

What facts? List them.

[WakanoBaka]

Was expecting shit.

Got shit.

 

 

13 hours ago, Nepenthe said:

So you're just here to play Devil's Advocate for arguments that have been debunked already.

No, I'm not here to play Devil's Advocate, for playing the 'Father of Lies' role would mean I enjoy it.

 

And there is nothing I hate more than lies.

People often point out the negative of the lad. Makes you think there is no positive. I feel as if Trump hate stenches of bandwagoning.

If you guys honestly wanted to weigh out the pros from the cons, you'd come at it with an unbais very.

But no, most republicans vote republicans, most democrats vote  democrats. It's only hardly that people vote people.

 

People ask me

"You are a black man, you've been to prison TWICE, you've been beaten because of your race before, you work TWO JANITOR JOBS. Why don't you hate Trump? He isn't for you."

 

I honestly don't care, you sound silly as fuck telling me what I should be offend by. I don't hate the guy because he's just like all the others. A Flawed meat head you trying to put in a seat, saying one thing, but as soon as they get behind the wheel, they can't do a damn thing because if the country was run so easily, both Lincoln and Kennedy wouldn't have been shot so easily.

Read about the fucking pros and cons. Chances are you never do that.

8 hours ago, Mikyeong said:

It isn't always about class but rather looking at the facts and chosing which candidate is for you.

This so much right now.

 

5 hours ago, Conquering Storm's Servant said:

What facts? List them.

And THAT is the problem.

N offense, but...

Why haven't you look for facts yourself?

How can you say you are voting or whatever when you are here asking for facts?

[Nepenthe]

13 minutes ago, WakanoBaka said:

Read about the fucking pros and cons. Chances are you never do that.

You have displayed absolutely no reasonable political knowledge in this thread or others nor provided any evidence to back up your claims. You also have not displayed any reasonable evidence that you have actually read any of the posts here which reference if not outright link to studies and articles for actual information. All you have fallen back on are emotional appeals and anti-intellectual equivocation fallacies where non-voters and fence sitters get on a high horse and praise themselves for slamming both political parties as meaningfully equivalent, proving they can't be assed to simply go to the candidates' websites and directly contrast policy proposals like an actual politically-responsible citizen would. And yet you're telling me to read.

Quote

Why haven't you look for facts yourself?

How can you say you are voting or whatever when you are here asking for facts?

He's asking Trump supporters in here for facts that support the growing insinuation that he deserves to be president because there is no reasonable argument that's been put forth in this thread yet that makes him a better pick than Hillary Clinton, meaning we're all here wondering what the fuck some of you are doing even entertaining the thought of throwing the election and Supreme Court picks just because he speaks his racist thoughts frankly and y'all are somehow magically starstruck by that.

[Rey Skywalker-Ren]

It's simply my opinion based on facts, but I do think Trump's policies are the best ones.

Considering that his healthcare plans will allow easy access for people get to get medicines a cheaper price buy tearing those barriers down - I say it's a great idea. Healthcare in this country is screwed in my opinion because it is so hard for people to get the care they need without going overseas, and while Universal Healthcare sounds nice on paper, you need a huge budget to keep it running and all that you don't really get the best care you deserve. And that is completely up to the government, so I am not ready to trust the government with healthcare. And lastly, please get rid of the idea that people are forced to buy insurance. (Especially when insurance in itself is....expensive)

While I do support this plan of Trump's to have a more free-market approach, I am worried that it will be TOO much under the mercy of the free-market. But then, I'm pretty sure he is going to WANT some regulation which is fine by me. I just want it to where I can get good healthcare but not for a freaking arm and a leg and not worried about paying more or being peanlised if my family decided to switch doctors or plans.I do understand about competition between markets which would make insurance prices go down (plus it's simple, the lower the prices, the more customers you have. the lower the prices, the more choices customers have).

Moving on to his economic policies; I support Trump's plan to close loopholes for the rich completely.  Considering that all they have to do is put money in a swiss bank account to avoid taxes, thus not paying their fair share. He's also for taxing the rich more because they make more money. Small businesses will not have to pay more than 15% of what they earn (and to be honest big businesses should pay more but yeah). The tax code itself is very simple:

and it is something I can stand behind because it takes family size into consideration.  Only a tiny %tage of people will have to pay more, however in all, this is something that people should be able to live with considering most... wouldn't have to pay taxes at all! From my understanding, when taxes were introduced, only the rich had to pay them and I want to say that Trump said he wanted to... go back to that(?).

All and all, these are my two main reasons. 

[Nepenthe]

Repealing Obamacare and replacing it with block programs and health savings accounts would immediately drop 21 million people from their insurance plans and add another $200-ish billion to the deficit. This would inevitably force all of these people to have to buy insurance, potentially putting a load on emergency rooms in the meantime (more money for taxpayers to shoulder), of which only 5% of people would be able to reasonably do so. The only thing potentially saving this plan would be the federal block grants- where the government gives the states money to use for healthcare- but considering Trump doesn't have numbers per state no one knows what in the world that would even do, ranging from saving absolutely no money whatsoever to somehow $850 billion, which would cover the initial cost but still does absolutely nothing to address the 21 million people with no plan anymore, meaning the net benefit of the absolute best negotiations possible is still that 21 million people are shit out of luck. But this is regardless of the fact that you want as many people as possible on health insurance because the tax revenue dilutes the cost of any one individual, which is why smarter countries got with the program on implementing a universal healthcare program of some sort. If ten people, for example, donate $2 towards a $20 pizza, you as an individual get access to the whole for much cheaper than if you were to have to shoulder seven other people's burden and and thus have to donate $6.67 (and the people who didn't pay would still get to eat pizza because you can't let people starve if they say they're hungry.) That is why insurance is currently expensive. That, and just general inefficiency, marketing, and bad negotiation with healthcare providers.

The paring down of the income tax code to four brackets still allows the rich to keep a much bigger chunk of change in relation to poorer people. Said closures would also decentivize charity giving since it couldn't be deducted anymore, which tends to be the thing conservatives say is all we need to maintain a social safety net, and incentivize tax inversion. All in all, tax cuts don't work in isolation unless you're going to do massive spending cuts to keep the budget at bay in relation to it (think about what happens when you personally spend money in your account you don't have), and considering Trump has no official positions about social welfare, infrastructure, energy, etc. on his platform, one can only assume he's not really touching that, thus this thing is just a way to get him and his buddies some nice tax breaks while the middle and poor class once again have to shoulder the tax burden for these programs or either see them removed entirely, either of which would be syooper dumb for us to do.

[Tani Coyote]

3 hours ago, WakanoBaka said:

But no, most republicans vote republicans, most democrats vote  democrats. It's only hardly that people vote people.

That probably has something to do with the fact those politicians generally line up well with your viewpoints which is why you joined their Party in the first place.

There's a sizable moderate swing base that the Parties try to capture every election. Not everyone is a mindless drone who chose their Party and never again questioned it (just look at what's going on with Trump and Sanders and you can see that there's a LOT of independent thinking within the Parties).

1 hour ago, Mikyeong said:

And that is completely up to the government, so I am not ready to trust the government with healthcare.

A very American sentiment, certainly, but it's been proven you can give the government control of basic services without turning into a totalitarian state.

The key is to keep things transparent while also having frequent elections that prevent consolidation of personal power. Ban private donations to campaigns and impose term limits on all offices and you can keep corruption and abuse of power fairly low.

Quote

And lastly, please get rid of the idea that people are forced to buy insurance. (Especially when insurance in itself is....expensive)

This makes sense only if people are allowed to die on the operating table.

As it stands, a person with no insurance can go in and get treatment. They're unable to pay, are discharged, and the costs are redistributed to people who have insurance.

Mandates make sense with this arrangement, as it ensures EVERYONE is paying into the system.

Never mind, asking for proof of payment before emergency care is also counter-intuitive because people who CAN absolutely pay lose precious seconds.

The idea of everyone having insurance makes sense. You raise the point of cost; this is fair. Though that's just more reason to have single payer. Your insurance is included in your tax bill, never mind your contribution to our society (yes, people who don't pay taxes generally aren't the freeloaders right wing pundits like to paint them as).

Quote

I just want it to where I can get good healthcare but not for a freaking arm and a leg and not worried about paying more or being peanlised if my family decided to switch doctors or plans.I do understand about competition between markets which would make insurance prices go down (plus it's simple, the lower the prices, the more customers you have. the lower the prices, the more choices customers have).

Eliminating private insurance would be an excellent option to drive prices down. Eliminate the profit motive, that's one cost taken down. Eliminate the army of clerks that are needed to keep track of all the different policies, that's more costs going down.

All insurance companies do is push money around and collect a lot off the top. They are some of the most worthless organizations ever devised and should be disposed of.

Quote

and it is something I can stand behind because it takes family size into consideration.  Only a tiny %tage of people will have to pay more, however in all, this is something that people should be able to live with considering most... wouldn't have to pay taxes at all! From my understanding, when taxes were introduced, only the rich had to pay them and I want to say that Trump said he wanted to... go back to that(?).

The issue is this system only works out if the government is providing minimal services. Once we decide what the responsibilities of the state are, we have to find a way to pay for it. The reason taxes have increased to where they are is because there are so many tasks assigned to the government, which also has taken on the role of global policeman.

Some advocate for the private sector or the states picking up the tab, but there's reasons both are bad ideas. Consider this: why is something part of the federal public sector now if it was in the private or state sector before? Chances are there was a problem with leaving it with either of those options.