Category: Gop

      During his first term, Trump successfully lobbied FIFA and secured the winning joint “United Bid” for the U.S., Canada, and Mexico to host the 2026 World Cup.The FIFA World Cup 2026 is officially underway in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. Major city centers across the U.S. are hosting, and “watch parties” are circling the venues and perhaps portions of the world.

The image below is a different, yet important localized, but growing trend focusing on a “watch party” in Washington DC. This watch party stands at the scene of the Kennedy Center treasure. The tarp conceals the removal of Trump’s name from this national tresure, as dictated by the court.

More importantly, this removal of the illegal stain of what some people considered to be graffiti, marks the first step in the removal of the legacy that he has spent the last 18 months attempting to build.

But not today…

Forbes/Reuters:
Oil Prices Hit $100 Again—Trump Touts Cost Hike Benefits

Trump touts oil price gains, saying ‘we make a lot of money,’ angering lawmakers

Oil Wealth and Public Benefit: The United States vs. the United Arab Emirates
On March 12, 2026, Donald Trump wrote on Truth Social that “the United States is the largest oil producer in the world, by far, so when oil prices go up, ‘we’ make a lot of money.” The statement came as gasoline prices in the United States climbed above roughly $3.60 per gallon following the escalation of the war involving Iran and disruptions to global oil shipping routes.
Forbes
Trump framed rising oil prices as manageable, even suggesting earlier in the week that higher prices were a “very small price to pay” if the conflict eliminated Iran’s nuclear threat.

Yahoo

However, the economic structure of oil wealth in the United States differs sharply from the system used in the United Arab Emirates. A comparison between the two reveals that while both countries produce large amounts of oil, the way oil revenue reaches ordinary citizens is fundamentally different.

Oil Production vs. Public Benefit in the United States
The United States is currently the world’s largest oil producer, generating millions of barrels of crude oil per day through a combination of conventional drilling and shale production.

FactCheck.org

Yet the financial gains from oil production primarily flow through private industry rather than directly to citizens.

Most U.S. oil production is carried out by private corporations. Revenue from oil sales is distributed to shareholders, corporate executives, and investors, while governments receive tax revenue and royalties. Those funds then enter general federal and state budgets rather than being distributed directly to individuals.

Economists frequently note that because oil is traded on a global market, American consumers still pay global prices even if the country produces large amounts of oil domestically. If companies can sell oil at higher prices abroad, they will do so, leaving U.S. consumers exposed to the same market forces affecting other countries.

PBS

As a result, rising oil prices generally mean higher costs for American households—especially for gasoline, transportation, and goods whose production relies heavily on petroleum.
The United States does provide some indirect public benefit from energy production through tax revenues, infrastructure spending, and employment in the energy sector. But there is no national program that distributes oil revenue directly to citizens. In practice, higher oil prices tend to benefit energy companies and investors more directly than ordinary consumers.

The UAE Model:
Oil Revenue as Public Welfare
In contrast, the system used in the United Arab Emirates distributes oil wealth to citizens through a government-funded welfare structure.
Although the federation includes several emirates such as Dubai and Abu Dhabi, roughly 96 percent of the UAE’s oil reserves are located in Abu Dhabi. Oil revenue from these resources forms a major pillar of the country’s public
finances.
Rather than distributing cash payments directly, the UAE government channels oil wealth into extensive social benefits for Emirati citizens. These include:

Free or heavily subsidized healthcare
Government-funded education through university
Subsidized utilities
Land grants and interest-free loans for housing
High employment in the public sector
No personal income tax
About 90 percent of working Emirati citizens are employed in government jobs, reflecting the state’s central role in distributing economic benefits.
Dubai itself now relies less on oil and more on tourism, finance, and trade, yet Emirati citizens there still benefit from the broader national system funded in large part by oil revenue.
Two Different Economic Models

The contrast between the United States and the UAE illustrates two very different approaches to natural resource wealth.
In the United States, oil production operates largely through a market-driven private sector model. Oil companies produce and sell energy on global markets, and profits flow primarily to investors and corporations. Government receives tax revenue but does not distribute oil income directly to the population.
In the UAE, oil production is tied closely to state-managed wealth distribution. The government uses oil revenue to fund social programs, infrastructure, and employment that directly benefit citizens.
As a result, when oil prices rise globally, Americans generally experience higher fuel and consumer costs, while in the UAE the financial gains from oil exports more directly support the welfare system that benefits citizens.
Conclusion
The United States and the United Arab Emirates are both major oil producers, yet their citizens experience the results of that production very differently.
Statements suggesting that higher oil prices mean “we make a lot of money” reflect the macroeconomic reality that the United States produces large amounts of oil. But the distribution of that wealth depends on how the industry is structured.
In the American system, oil revenue primarily strengthens corporate profits and government tax receipts, while consumers continue to pay global energy prices. In the UAE’s model, oil income is used more directly to finance public benefits for citizens.
The difference highlights how the management of natural resources—not just the amount produced—determines whether national oil wealth translates into tangible benefits for the public.

While citizens of the UAE are beloved members of the nation’s largesse, sharing in the wealth and bounty of the country, including free health care and higher education,citizens of the United States are scorned and often put upon, should they fall upon the mercy of the state.
When Donald trump smiles, boasts and posts about the bountiful position that the “excursions” of war are raining down – he ain’t talking to or about you, peasant.

  Why the United States Remains an Outlier on Universal Health Care

Roughly 70 percent of the world’s nations provide some form of universal health coverage to their citizens, according to data compiled by the World Health Organization and the World Bank. These systems vary widely in structure — ranging from single-payer models like Canada’s to regulated multi-payer systems like Germany’s — but they share a core principle: access to essential medical services is treated as a public good rather than a market luxury.

The United States stands apart0 mfroml most other high-income nations by not guaranteeing universal health coverage at the national level. While programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), and Affordable Care Act marketplaces have expanded access, coverage remains fragmented and conditional. As of recent estimates, tens of millions of Americans remain uninsured or underinsured, often delaying care because of cost concerns.

What makes the U.S. case particularly unusual is not only the absence of universal coverage, but the cultural and political framing that often accompanies it. Unlike many peer nations that treat public healthcare as foundational infrastructure — similar to roads, public schools, or emergency services — healthcare in the U.S. is frequently debated through the lens of individual responsibility, market competition, and ideological resistance to government involvement.

This resistance has deep historical roots. Employer-based insurance expanded during World War II due to wage controls, entrenching private insurance as the dominant access pathway. Subsequent reform efforts, from President Truman’s proposals in the 1940s to the Affordable Care Act in 2010, faced strong opposition from insurance industry groups, political coalitions, and segments of the electorate wary of government expansion.

Ironically, despite rejecting universal coverage, the United States spends more on healthcare per capita than any other country in the world. Yet this spending does not consistently translate into superior health outcomes. Metrics such as life expectancy, maternal mortality, and preventable hospitalizations often lag behind those of nations with universal systems. Administrative complexity, profit-driven pricing structures, and fragmented billing systems contribute to inefficiencies that inflate costs without proportional public benefit.

Public opinion also reflects contradiction. Polling consistently shows that large majorities of Americans support protections for pre-existing conditions, Medicare for seniors, and expanded public health programs. However, support drops when proposals are framed as “government-run” or labeled with politically charged terminology, illustrating how messaging shapes perception more than policy substance.

Ultimately, the U.S. healthcare debate is not simply about economics or logistics — it is about national priorities. Countries that implement universal coverage make a collective decision to pool risk and guarantee baseline care for all residents. The United States, by contrast, continues to operate within a hybrid model that blends public programs with private profit, leaving coverage uneven and access dependent on income, employment, and geography.

As global health systems evolve and demographic pressures increase, the American outlier status becomes harder to justify. Whether the country chooses reform through expansion of public options or structural overhaul, the fundamental question remains unchanged: should healthcare function primarily as a marketplace commodity, or as a shared public necessity?

FINAL WORD: Without a doubt, every human being needs some form of medical guidance and care, while the conservative party of the United States is proud of the pain that they inflict.