Man, beyond all hope, you're really stretching to look for things to disagree with me about. If you actually read my posts, rather than pre-formulating some minutae to disagree about in midstream, you'd see that:
1) Nobody ever said that academic attendings are immune to lawsuits. I specifically noted that I realized that (and I can't believe I have to repost this) "I know that a lot of attendings in high-risk specialties have left hospitals because of lack of malpractice insurance, so I'm not absolutely sure of how this works". I also said that my opinion on this issue came from talking with attendings themselves, who stated that they were "relatively insulated" (bold added) from the issue. If you have a disagreement with this statement, maybe you should take it up with those attendings.
2) In terms of using the word "caps", my reply to the OP stated that "I guess I shouldn't have said 'caps'. doepug is more accurate in saying that they are given base salaries. Still, I think that there are intrinsic caps in academic medicine, even if they are not institutional policies. (No matter how much you do as an academic physician, I don't think you'll be able to match the salary of a private practitioner.)"
I'm sure it's quite boring for most people to have to read my posts twice (maybe it was boring the first time around). Whatever the case, try reading before you respond.