Well im excited to see the next President to scrap Trumpcare in replace with "their last name"care lol

Without the changes Obamacare would implode. Obamacare failed because there was no competition, only monopoly. This is why the US has the most expensive healthcare system in the world but offers the lowest value for the money.

Trumps vision and the republican vision of the perfect healthcare system differ a lot. Trumps vision is much much closer to Obamas vision and even Obamacare is not what it was meant to be due to political compromise that crippled the idea. If done right, public healthcare can be a really good idea as the healthcare system in other western countries outside the US is far superior and cheaper and also covers everyone. If you live outside the US you get more value for a much lower price. Because of the bad healthcare system the US live expectancy is so bad that it could be a 3rd world country. Trump wants to change that.

And most importantly it is not Trumps fault that Obamacare fails and things get worse for a while. It is Obamas fault.

That'd be great but its no secret that a significant percentage of the US Defense budget goes to protecting many European countries, many of which got to florish because they don't have to worry about spending truckloads of money on military. Cut the budget and we'll see many unhappy countries who haven't invested much money into defending themselves into a precarious position.

Yeah in canada we never really spend money on the army as we are like 'why do we need modern fighter jets, the Americans have them'

There are reasons beyond the healthcare system as to why the United States cost-per-capita are far higher than other nations, for example:

Notice that the cost of healthcare per citizen varies quite a bit between the states, and there's a strong link between the state's obesity level, and their healthcare costs.

The most obese states have an average obesity population of 34.66%, the least obese states have an average obese population of 21.9%.
The most obese states have average healthcost per 100k of   $54.6m, the least obese states have average healthcost per 100k of $34.3m

That is, the most obese states obesity rate is 60% higher than the least obese states, and their healthcare costs are also 60% higher.

US obesity rate at national level 36% 
France obesity rate at national level 10%
Sweden obesity rate at 18%

Obesity is just one variable that needs to be considered. Also factor in that the USA is in the top half of suicide rates in the OECD. and has a higher fertility rate than the EU (more babies born per year = higher cost per person)

While true that there may be issues in the USA's healthcare system that causes there to be some increase in the cost-per-capita vis-a-vis other countries, to say that it's "double" and this is entirely because of the different systems would be an incorrect position.

One other thing we need to consider here is: according to who? All of my sources in this post have used different measures for different things. I tried to find, for example, obesity numbers for UK and Germany, but they were lumped in with all "overweight". And how do they define such things? Whole population or just adults? What defines an adult, over 16, 18, 21? May depend on who's collecting the data.

How does immigration play into things, or the percentage of old people?

Finally, what is healthcare? California, New Mexico, Washington, and Maryland consider acupuncture to be healthcare. What about alternate medicine? Some states include massage therapy, herbal medication to be a part of healthcare. At the Federal level, Senator Rand Paul's healthcare Bill also defines taking vitamin supplements as healthcare. With such variance in just one country in what constitutes healthcare, how can we compare at an international level, where such variances are even more extreme?

My grandmother lives in the UK. She has bowl cancer, and is currently on treatment for it. However, the treatment is considered experimental, and so the NHS doesn't cover it. As a result, she's getting the treatment from the charity Cancer Research UK (a great institution). The drug is costing the charity tens of thousands of pounds per year. Does this get counted as healthcare?

My point isn't whether or not something counts as healthcare, my point is that when you compare country A to country B, are you comparing the same thing? If one country provides vitamins as a part of their healthcare system, and another doesn't, the one who provides will look like a more expensive one, comparatively.

The overall point of my post isn't that the US healthcare system is good or bad, or other systems. My point is that when people read things like "x in y is a and x in z is b", they should apply critical thinking to see if there are other things that explain a large part of the difference - such as differences in measurements (VERY important when comparing national statistics), or completely third-party variables that may have an effect (such as obesity rates, fertility rates, percentage of elderly, crime/poverty rates, cultural acceptance of vaccinations, treatments, contraceptives, etc), but which the author of the claim chose to ignore, or did not consider themselves.

Because here's the thing, right, if people don't apply such thinking and don't consider other things, it becomes very likely that people end up treating the symptom of another, more important underlying cancer.

As for the rest of your post, I agree that there are subtantial differences between states. As I posted however, the rate of obesity between USA and Sweden is about double. If obesity is a cause of difference (I'm not claiming it is, I'm just saying that it's a factor that really should be considered), then it would explain a large chunk of those numbers that you read of it being 3 times higher.

If the states have something in common, it can't really be the factor that differentiates.

Personally, on the drug issue, I supported Sanders measure to allow the importation of drugs from other countries. I also think that Medicare/Medicaid/the VA should negogiate harder, that FDA approval should be streamlined (FDA, for example, has blocked all competitors to the EpiPen - whereas the EU has approved several competitors - a potential explanation for the factor 10 price difference, FDA has created a monopoly), and that issues like medical patents / other policies that keep new drugs from coming into market should be a real topic of discussion for healthcare reform.

Also, I'm not supporting Trumpcare in anyway, or attacking/defending Obamacare. I think Obamacare is a toxic system that replaced another toxic system, and that Trumpcare will do the same - if it even gets through Congress. The likelihood of any real reform that does anything other than making things get worse is extremely likely to fail. Whether you're coming at it from a free-markets angle, or the socialized-healthcare angle, Congress is antithecial to both.

I would like a system where if you don't need it, you don't have to pay for other people who do need it. I like the idea of single payer, but that won't work because we have way too many people who won't be paying their share. It's is not my fault or problem if someone else is sickly. And there are way too many people who are sickly due to their own choices.

When you spend like 10 times as much as anyone else... nah.

Even if you cut it in half or more, US would still be a superpower.

Also that isnt even needed to get a working health care system in place.

The US already spends enough on health, you guys just dont use money well.

this is just trump wanting his name on the 'product'. nothing else
he couldn't stand the ACA being called Obamacare, so now he names the thing with his name on it... classy baby

This is a "Non-Official Website" as it says at the top, and the details of "Trumpcare" are still being debated.