|
silence_kit posted:Doctors in the US make so much money. But whenever this subject comes up in this thread, the consensus is 'can't cut pay for doctors! gotta pay the doctors!'. I think people in this thread are either doctors, are married to a doctor, or have watched one too many medical dramas on TV. To become a doctor in the US right now, most people have to incur large amounts of student debt and go through an insanely competitive academic track that, depending on how ambitious you (or your family are) starts at around age 14. 6 year medical tracks are especially competitive, so you're likely looking at 8 years of school just to get the MD (which isn't a degree that easily takes you into other jobs). Depending on your desired specialty, you could have multiple residency stints (and maybe fellowships) as well as multiple board certification examinations to make yourself desirable to a rather frustrating patient market. Upon becoming employable, you will then spend normal business hours and on-call stints servicing a wide spectrum of anxious sick people who may or may not be able and willing to pay you once you actually provide your services. If your field is one where you have to join insurer provider networks to be solvent, your income will be getting continually squeezed by private insurers (who may audit you at any point if your billing patterns are "suspicious" and require you to hire outside counsel) and your diagnoses will often be second-guessed in an effort to control costs and justify claim rehections. You may need to pay for staff (or outsourcing) just to deal with all the billing paperwork. And don't forget about needing to pay for malpractice insurance and litigation-related risks. So with all that, doctors do feel a pretty strong to get paid. I'm not denying that everyone needs to take some pain in order to have a saner, more humane healthcare system, but I think you're being a bit flippant on why doctors get defensive about cost-cutting talk when they're often the ones bearing the brunt of the cuts and the first ones that patients blow up at.
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Brony Car posted:To become a doctor in the US right now, most people have to incur large amounts of student debt and go through an insanely competitive academic track that, depending on how ambitious you (or your family are) starts at around age 14. 6 year medical tracks are especially competitive, so you're likely looking at 8 years of school just to get the MD (which isn't a degree that easily takes you into other jobs). Depending on your desired specialty, you could have multiple residency stints (and maybe fellowships) as well as multiple board certification examinations to make yourself desirable to a rather frustrating patient market. Perhaps part of a rollout should include something approximating a debt-forgiveness program for doctors participating in the program.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:07
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:
All the doctors in the US just agreed with you and decided to cut their income to $100,000 from the average of $200,000. We just lowered the overall cost of health care in the US by 2.3%. High fives all around.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
The average salary increase and tax treament of doctors in the U.S. outweighs the total debt they accrue after about 2.5 years. That is an extremely good trade-off. If you drop out of your last year of medical school, then you're boned. But pretending that student debt is the reason doctors get paid so much and justifies their groaning is silly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
I remember a poster in one of these threads complaining 'if you graduate last in your medical school class, you might have to accept a position in a less lucrative specialty in the Midwest/South, where you'll only get low 6 figures coming out of school.' I can't think of many other fields where you can almost flunk out of school and basically come out with a 6 figure salary guaranteed for life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:11
|
|
|
Lote posted:All the doctors in the US just agreed with you and decided to cut their income to $100,000 from the average of $200,000. Reducing the cost of healthcare in the U.S. by 2.3% would save more money than the entire annual budget of the NHS in England, Scotland, Ireland, and France.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The average salary increase and tax treament of doctors in the U.S. outweighs the total debt they accrue after about 2.5 years. How is that possible considering an MD gets about 50k-60k/year for those 2.5 years?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:Upon becoming employable, you will then spend normal business hours and on-call stints servicing a wide spectrum of anxious sick people who may or may not be able and willing to pay you once you actually provide your services. If your field is one where you have to join insurer provider networks to be solvent, your income will be getting continually squeezed by private insurers (who may audit you at any point if your billing patterns are "suspicious" and require you to hire outside counsel) and your diagnoses will often be second-guessed in an effort to control costs and justify claim rehections. You may need to pay for staff (or outsourcing) just to deal with all the billing paperwork. So sell it on that! "Doctors, would you like to fire most of your office staff? Think of the money you could save! Tired of deadbeat patients? We pay, guaranteed by the US government! Simplify your life so you can get down to what you do best - doctoring."
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:The average salary increase and tax treament of doctors in the U.S. outweighs the total debt they accrue after about 2.5 years. It's not just the student debt. Residency and fellowship hours are pretty brutal (with low salaries in comparison to the work you're doing) and the costs of maintaining a practice are susbtantial, although not necessarily obvious. It's also compounded by the fact that many doctors are seeing classmates go into finance or other business sectors that are making even more while not being told to take one for the team. One can easily feel picked on unfairly in that kind of situation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:18
|
|
|
Brony Car posted:To become a doctor in the US right now, most people have to incur large amounts of student debt and go through an insanely competitive academic track that, depending on how ambitious you (or your family are) starts at around age 14. 6 year medical tracks are especially competitive, so you're likely looking at 8 years of school just to get the MD (which isn't a degree that easily takes you into other jobs). Depending on your desired specialty, you could have multiple residency stints (and maybe fellowships) as well as multiple board certification examinations to make yourself desirable to a rather frustrating patient market. Lol, people in other jobs who get paid a lot have to manage other people and work a lot too
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Reducing the cost of healthcare in the U.S. by 2.3% would save more money than the entire annual budget of the NHS in England, Scotland, Ireland, and France. No. Where are you getting these numbers? Healthcare spending in the USA is $3.4 Trillion per year. 2% is nowhere near the budget for the NHS of the U.K., let alone Ireland and France.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:19
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:So sell it on that! "Doctors, would you like to fire most of your office staff? Think of the money you could save! Tired of deadbeat patients? We pay, guaranteed by the US government! Simplify your life so you can get down to what you do best - doctoring." Most of my doctor friends and relatives (including some lifelong Republicans) have gotten on the single payer train because of this. They don't see any other way out that doesn't turn the medical profession into an inhumane sweatshop.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:20
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:There is no reason to think a single-payer system would require people to give up the ability to obtain private care outside the system if they so choose. It is not politically possible to pass a system that doesn't because a large majority of Americans have health coverage and won't risk losing it to something that hasn't yet been proven. You can eventually push out all but the highest of the high-end private care once it's been proven, but you can't start off with forcing everyone onto the new system. You have to entice them onto it. I'd like to sign-up for Medicaid please  I dont want to be raped by an insurance company for going to get treatment I need. I want to hand the doctor my card and know I will not be denied. If I'm in ungodly accident/taken by ambulance I want to know I wont be put into bankruptcy. I want to know my employees will get the same. BlueBlazer fucked around with this message at 18:02 on Jun 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:
Anecdote - I was in a nasty car wreck and state trooper called an ambulance in and I had to very forcefully deny them from taking me to the hospital while concussed with a bleeding scalp wound. This was during the recession and I had no insurance and was doing piece work to get by, I could not have afforded the ambulance ride and had to stumble through getting the tow-truck driver to take me home. It was one of the worst days of my life and not because I was injured, but because if that ambulance took me and I was treated I'd have been in bankruptcy for years. I was a hair away from loosing consciousness the whole time, and knew if I blacked out it was over. The fear of being in medical debt for the next 10 years was more than the fact if I passed out my brain would swell up and I'd die.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:I'd like to sign-up for Medicaid please These are far from compatible with each other.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Doctor salaries are not a problem. Medical device companies, pharmaceutical companies, and hospitals are the suppliers of the majority of healthcare dollars. The professional services doctors charge are a small portion of the total spend.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
baquerd posted:These are far from compatible with each other. I didn't say every doctor. Farnsworth Archinbold's doctor is not going to treat me. I'll go to a hole in the wall, I'm ok with that. It's better then roulette I currently experience now. I had Applecare (Obamacare/Medicaid in WA) and didn't have any issue finding a care provider.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Reik posted:Doctor salaries are not a problem. Medical device companies, pharmaceutical companies, and hospitals are the suppliers of the majority of healthcare dollars. The professional services doctors charge are a small portion of the total spend. Doctors did, however, block all attempts at reforming the employer paid system until it was too late. Three generations of Americans know nothing outside of "good respectable people have their employers pay for it and not government."
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:41
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Doctors did, however, block all attempts at reforming the employer paid system until it was too late. Three generations of Americans know nothing outside of "good respectable people have their employers pay for it and not government." The current generation knows "I can't afford a doctor and I cant get a company to hire me that has an insurance plan."
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Look at the classifieds in your local paper, there are a lot of positions that guarantee 75% of hours offered and if you work it out golly it always comes out to no health benefits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
BlueBlazer posted:The current generation knows "I can't afford a doctor and I cant get a company to hire me that has an insurance plan." And even then, the employer - backed insurance could just tell you to go gently caress yourself and not cover anything.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 19:50
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Look at the classifieds in your local paper, there are a lot of positions that guarantee 75% of hours offered and if you work it out golly it always comes out to no health benefits. Or like in my situation they offer it but don't contribute, thus bumping me into the "family glitch" so I cant get subsidies for my family of 4.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 20:32
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Some encouraging news: https://mobile.twitter.com/TopherSpiro/status/877250763373907968
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 20:53
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Some encouraging news: I'm really curious what is in the bill that it's making both Cruz/Paul and Murkowski/Collins say no.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Some encouraging news: What the gently caress? Cruz? Paul? Isn't Cruz writing the bill?
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:What the gently caress? Cruz? Paul? No, he's just one of the 13 Senators who is allowed to view the bill in the working group. Nobody knows which of those 13 are actively drafting it (Mike Lee is in the group and claims to not know all the details of what is in the bill) or how much each person is contributing.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Some encouraging news: Skeptical because I'm not sure how you can get those particular no's together like that.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
Optimus Prime Rib posted:I'm really curious what is in the bill that it's making both Cruz/Paul and Murkowski/Collins say no. I know this kind of speculation is just useless but literally only those people and maybe their staff know if those are hard no's or "pay attention to me" no's
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
DaveWoo posted:Some encouraging news: Spoiler warning: they'll make it more evil to get the Cruz wing on-board, and then Murkowski wing will fold like cheap suits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
Office Pig posted:Skeptical because I'm not sure how you can get those particular no's together like that. A bill can be too terrible for a moderate and not terrible enough for the King of Flies.
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
gently caress you Portman
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Zachack posted:A bill can be too terrible for a moderate debatable
|
|
#
?
Jun 20, 2017 22:02
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:What the gently caress? Cruz? Paul? Cruz is going to vote no and then use that as a platform when he primaries Trump in 2020 "I voted to save your healthcare" Any "no" vote is a potential candidate
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
EugeneJ posted:Cruz is going to vote no and then use that as a platform when he primaries Trump in 2020 He is also trying to go hard right to avoid a primary at home in 2018.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
empty whippet box posted:What the gently caress? Cruz? Paul? Paul literally exists to vote No on absolutely everything that doesn't instantly dissolve the Federal Government. Cruz is a real surprise though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:01
|
|
|
please BASED rand paul and Lyin' Ted save our mothers and fathers from death for all the wrong reasons
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:23
|
|
|
I dunno that I'd consider Topher Spiro a hugely reliable source, here. Like, I'm not saying he's lying, and it's good news that they don't have the votes atm, but he's definitely one inclined to slant things his way. Pretty cautious about how hard those "no" commitments are.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 03:36
|
|
|
eviltastic posted:I dunno that I'd consider Topher Spiro a hugely reliable source, here. Like, I'm not saying he's lying, and it's good news that they don't have the votes atm, but he's definitely one inclined to slant things his way. Pretty cautious about how hard those "no" commitments are. Yeah, I'm pretty pessimistic that any republican senator is going to willingly be labeled "The person who saved Obamacare" when push comes to shove.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
Has anyone noted that John McCain's vote on AHCA is going to kill more Americans than the VietCong ever did?* Why aren't the Democrats pushing this in his face every minute? * American casualties in Vietnam war: 58,200 * AHCA deaths per year estimated at ~24,000 * Therefore every ~2.4 years the AHCA yields one Vietnam War worth of dead Americans. (AHCA cuts will probably be implemented over time which screws with the projection at first, but whatever. In the long run, the AHCA is gonna kill more Americans than Vietnam.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 13:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Chimp_On_Stilts posted:Has anyone noted that John McCain's vote on AHCA is going to kill more Americans than the VietCong ever did?* Voters don't really care that someone poor from somewhere else might die. The Democrats need to work on the "Your healthcare will suck because of this bill, even if you are covered by work" angle.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2017 15:03
|
|