Changing careers becuse of Obama???

[DO2Be2013]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How about car insurance then?

Very poor comparison. Auto insurance is not truly mandatory in this nation since driving an automobile is not mandatory. People have viable options for transportation if they cannot afford to own and insure a car. Public transportation, taxi, bike, walking, ride-sharing, etc. Lots of people in urban areas choose not to own cars. There is a choice there.

 

[DO2Be2013]

No need to be presumptuous. I am in my thirties, have had the time to read more than 10,000 books, travel extensively, earn two college degrees, and probably have twice your life-experience. I'm not saying that you are unqualified to debate; just that you shouldn't be so quick to belittle the sources and background of people who disagree with you.🙂

Really, I didn't see him/her assuming anything regarding your age, the extent of your foreign travels or the number of degrees you've earned...

Anyway, I'm kind of amazed that, assuming you started reading "real" books by the age of 10, you claim to have read an average of one and a half books every single day of your life for the last twenty-plus years. Day in and day out, 1 to 2 entire books. Remarkable.

 

[TopQuark]

There are unfortunately already several models of this already setting a precedent: the first that come to mind are automobile insurance and homeowner's insurance. A precedent for a government-run single-payer system would be more like the military, which we are all forced to support, or, locally, the fire department.

Close, but still significantly different. Auto and homeowner insurance aren't forced, and aren't for "you're own good." You don't have to buy a car nor do you have to drive it on roads shared by others who you could kill or maim. Auto insurance ensures that you'll be able to cover any damages you cause to others or their property.

I don't think homeowner's insurance is required by law. I'm under the impression that it's just a standard policy for getting a home loan. If your house burns down, the bank that lent you the money wants to ensure the mortage gets paid. If you bought the home up front, in cash, no one cares.

But that's, you know, government. It's not going to go away

Another reason I don't want it overly involved in healthcare. If a new government programs makes things worse, it doesn't go away. The argument will just be made that there wasn't enough government and said program needs to be expanded(Medicare/medicaid anyone?). There's nothing quite as permanent as a temporary government program. This is unacceptable when its my life and livelihood on the line

I'm sure that we all have different views about what a government is best used for. Some people insist on a military, some want roads, some want public transportation, some want a more equitable distribution of health care, some want the government to keep its hands off business, some want the government to rein in business. That's why we each exercise what political power we have and hope that it all balances out in the end,

Luckily, we have a Constitution that spells out, in detail, just what government's role is. We also have a Bill of Rights that spells out what my rights as a citizen are, just in case a sitting government should forget. We are a republic, not a democracy, because these documents place restrictions on the responsibilities and power of government. They protect us from an overreaching government and a tyranny of the majority.

 

[voitokas]

Really, I didn't see him/her assuming anything regarding your age, the extent of your foreign travels or the number of degrees you've earned...
Anyway, I'm kind of amazed that, assuming you started reading "real" books by the age of 10, you claim to have read an average of one and a half books every single day of your life for the last twenty-plus years. Day in and day out, 1 to 2 entire books. Remarkable.

Ha ha! I guess I did come off sounding like kind of an ass. I was probably too quick to take offense at the poster's dismissive tone. About the reading thing, more like an average of one book a day over thirty years - not particularly remarkable; I used to have trouble sleeping, and I don't watch television...

 

[ncguy2005]

Maybe someone here will know, but it was my understanding that the healthcare bill in its present state is just a hollow shell of what it was intended to be. So is it really going to impact physicians as much as originally thought?

 

[TopQuark]

Ha ha! I guess I did come off sounding like kind of an ass. I was probably too quick to take offense at the poster's dismissive tone. About the reading thing, more like an average of one book a day over thirty years - not particularly remarkable; I used to have trouble sleeping, and I don't watch television...

I was dismissing your "reading" of history. If you look at the post I quoted you on:

And if the government lifted some of its regulation of commerce and trade? More poor, a greater divide between strata. My projection, anyway, based on my reading of history

You'll see that you first dismiss my reading of history in favor of yours. Yours being that more government equals less poverty. I then explained why your reading is wrong by giving five obvious examples where more government does not equal less poverty. Your reading is thus wrong, and therefore can be dismissed. I don't doubt you've read a lot of books. Based on your interpretation of my posts and your reading of history though, your reading comprehension is still a little lacking (so I've bolded my main points).

 

[slight365]

I was dismissing your "reading" of history. If you look at the post I quoted you on:



You'll see that you first dismiss my reading of history in favor of yours. Yours being that more government equals less poverty. I then explained why your reading is wrong by giving five obvious examples where more government does not equal less poverty. Your reading is thus wrong, and therefore can be dismissed. I don't doubt you've read a lot of books. Based on your interpretation of my posts and your reading of history though, your reading comprehension is still a little lacking (so I've bolded my main points).

Based on history, but not reading what's going on now, in Europe, the land of socialism and extreme government regulation, and the impending collapse of several of the Union's and Eurozone's largest contributors, along with Germany's hit that will be taken for them, and the impending collapse of the Euro. Yes, the EU and government regulation worked out great. We're all worrying here in Germany that we only have one year before **** hits the fan, since 2011 will bring practically emergency measures which are not sustainable.

 

[DrYoda]

Nurses dont make 90k/yr working 40hrs. This is bogus. I am a nurse myself. I dont know where people got that from. Yeah I have friends making that but they work two jobs or work a lot of overtime. If a nurse tell you that he/she make 90k/yr in a non management typ e position...dont believe them. I heard the west coast or the north east they can make that; however, in most part of the country nurses median salary is 50k-65k/year.

I know two in the midwest making big $$$ on fairly low hours. I recognize it's not the norm, but it happens.

Although, as long as it continues to take money from individuals who lawfully earned it to subsidize those who didn't, I will never be in favor of more of it.

Specifically (since you asked for it), I believe its a violation of my individual rights for the federal government to penalize financial inaction, i.e. me not buying a financial product(health insurance). If passed, this sets a legislative precedent for similar federal coercion. Such policy is antithetical to a free society.

These two statements don't mesh well. If you refuse to buy health insurance and then break your leg, myself and other tax paying Americans are being forced to pay for your ER visit.

 

[DrYoda]

Maybe someone here will know, but it was my understanding that the healthcare bill in its present state is just a hollow shell of what it was intended to be. So is it really going to impact physicians as much as originally thought?

It is a hollow shiell of what it was intended to be, Spending lots of money for what I'm guessing will be minimal effect. However, large medicare cuts are still in place, and the SGR has yet to be fixed. So as it stands, physicians are still getting hit hard.

 

[exPCM]

Reimbursements have been going down for about 25 years not 8 or 10.
Congress froze fees from 1984 to 1986 and it has been basically downhill since.
Here is just a sampling:

Here is some background on what has happened:
http://www.nihp.org/Issue Briefs/Physican fee under Medicare Issue Brief.htm
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=5416&type=0

 

[JaggerPlate]

Reimbursements have been going down for about 25 years not 8 or 10.
Congress froze fees from 1984 to 1986 and it has been basically downhill since.
Here is just a sampling:

Here is some background on what has happened:
http://www.nihp.org/Issue Briefs/Physican fee under Medicare Issue Brief.htm
http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=5416&type=0

It crack me up to learn (which I've heard more and more lately), that this whole decline started in the early to mid eighties, which I always thought was the hay-day. I suppose it's gotten to a pretty low point, and of course salaries were greater when the decline first started, but attitudes (mine included) make it seem like this kick in the pants is a new phenomenon, when really, it's been a slow, progressive decline.

 

[TopQuark]

These two statements don't mesh well. If you refuse to buy health insurance and then break your leg, myself and other tax paying Americans are being forced to pay for your ER visit.

I'm not in favor of forcing all Americans to pay for my broken leg; I thought that was pretty clear in my above posts. If taxpayers are picking up the tab for uninsured broken legs, it's an indirect cost, at best, through federal/state monies that might go to fund the hospital. I'd argue my uninsured leg would be most directly covered by the other people who use that hospital (the ones that pay, of course). No one that pays is forced, by law, to go to any one hospital, and therefore no one is forced to pay for my leg. At the moment, being born in America does not oblige you to pay for my broken leg. More simply put, you can exist for free. Government doesn't start taking from you until you decide to buy a home, buy a car, buy anything that's legal, get a job, etc. (not overly burdensome at all😉).

Your argument is a decent one, "irresponsibility indirectly costs everyone more, so we should all be forced to be responsible," but I don't agree that it holds water. The financial and moral cost of forcing "responsibility" on otherwise lawful citizens seems easily more expensive than their "irresponsibility." I'm also 99.999999% sure that I'd disagree with the people who would decide what's "responsible."

On another note, I actually read somewhere that EDs add more to hospital revenue than they subtract (not a lot of expensive equipment, high volume of pts, some of those pts actually pay, staff salaries aren't overly high, etc.). Although, I'm not interested in looking it up, so I'll save that discussion for another day.

I'll stop my flaming capitalist rant after this...I promise...maybe...

 

[TopQuark]

To be clear, if Karl Marx II became president and somehow made my labor property of the state, I would still want to be a physician. That is, if I wasn't killed in the revolution.

 

[ajhxxxiii]

To be clear, if Karl Marx II became president and somehow made my labor property of the state, I would still want to be a physician. That is, if I wasn't killed in the revolution, of course.

LOL at that.

 

[avatarftw]

a

 

[Shasan546]

I admit I almost changed my career plans because of healthcare reform. I was attending pre law meetings a few weeks ago they sucked so much. But I decided I was trying to justify a career change based on money, and I realized that money isn't the reason I want to become a doctor. I want to become a doctor, even if I'm royally screwed by the government 😱 lol. There is already a shortage of doctors and that number is only going to go up, and I feel it's my duty to help as many people I can (not trying to sound overly altruistic). We're going to become doctors because we're compassionate people and want to help others.

Law Has no money in it either. Lawyers out of Top schools are getting deferred or are finding no employment. Or they are getting hired for $50-60k when they are in debt 150k+ just like doctors. Lawyers have it a lot worse right now. Only TOP 10% of most schools get jobs at BIGlaw (lawfirms over 101 associates usually) that pay 100k+. Most lawyers that graduate bottom 50% jsut paid 150k for a piece of toilet paper.

Trust me for all the doctors that are complaining their are 100s of others in different fields already suffering.

We do need socialized med or something. We spend more per patient (average) than any other country. Our system is broken and something needs to be done. The biggest issue is us being the fattest most disgusting country.

And socialized med can work. It works in Canada pretty well. I know many doctors in canada that make the same as their american counterparts.

 

[JaggerPlate]

I've heard the exact thing about law from people in l school right now. Things could get interested for ole' Obama's plan though with the potential for this new guy from Massachusetts to throw a little more power the Repubs way.

 

[123165]

And socialized med can work. It works in Canada pretty well. I know many doctors in canada that make the same as their american counterparts.

This really depends on who you ask.

 

[TopQuark]

Law Has no money in it either. Lawyers out of Top schools are getting deferred or are finding no employment. Or they are getting hired for $50-60k when they are in debt 150k+ just like doctors. Lawyers have it a lot worse right now. Only TOP 10% of most schools get jobs at BIGlaw (lawfirms over 101 associates usually) that pay 100k+. Most lawyers that graduate bottom 50% jsut paid 150k for a piece of toilet paper.

Exaggerate much?

We do need socialized med or something.

Ugh... I'll take some of that "or something."

We spend more per patient (average) than any other country. Our system is broken and something needs to be done.

Could you please elaborate as to why spending more per patient than other countries=our system is broken? Maybe we just care more about healthcare 😎. I think it could just be a sign that Americans have more disposable income to spend on luxuries like top notch medical care that might not be available to people in other countries. If healthcare appropriations become just another senate line item that can be cut or increased according to prevailing political winds and regardless of supply and demand, I don't believe that situation would be any better.

The biggest issue is us being the fattest most disgusting country.

Now you're just being mean. We might be fat, but I think that goes back to the disposable income issue that I brought up earlier. It's also a much bigger problem than giving everyone "free" healthcare will solve. ("free" because there's no such thing as a free lunch).

And socialized med can work. It works in Canada pretty well.

If we follow suit, where will the Canadians go to get timely care??

 

[Shasan546]

Exaggerate much?

Are you kidding me? Im assuming your just another clueless med student who is clueless about any other field except your own. Lawyers are making **** nowadays. Look on some Law school forums. Lawyers are at an abundance today like never before, with less and less jobs to go around. Unless you get into one of the top 20-30 schools in the country and graduate top 50% from those schools you get jobs paying 50-60k if your lucky. Now these schools are insanely competitive to get into.

Now most people don't get into these schools. the other 70 schools in the top 100 are still good schools but big firms hire from the t14 of law schools. In this economy grads from Fordham in the top 50% have been deferred, which means you were not hired but you may have an offer a year from now. BTW the top 30 or so schools require lsat scores of over 90%+ and even than its no guarantee. At least as a doctor you know you will get a residency somewhere and a decent paying job. **** i have friend who graduated near the bottom 50% of their classes but still got decent residencies.

Now imagine if your in the bottom 50% of your class from a school out of the top 30 (like cardozo, brooklyn law school, rutgers, SJU; etc all good schools) You have just paid 150k+ to get a 50-60k job if your LUCKY.

Law schools seats are abundant. There are over 200 law schools in the country! Most schools have 200+ seats!

Like i said for every doctor complaining he's going to lose $100k in income there are people losing jobs or getting paid 30-50k. And these are people with professional degrees!

 

[Shasan546]

Exaggerate much?
Ugh... I'll take some of that "or something."

Could you please elaborate as to why spending more per patient than other countries=our system is broken? Maybe we just care more about healthcare 😎. I think it could just be a sign that Americans have more disposable income to spend on luxuries like top notch medical care that might not be available to people in other countries. If healthcare appropriations become just another senate line item that can be cut or increased according to prevailing political winds and regardless of supply and demand, I don't believe that situation would be any better.

Now you're just being mean. We might be fat, but I think that goes back to the disposable income issue that I brought up earlier. It's also a much bigger problem than giving everyone "free" healthcare will solve. ("free" because there's no such thing as a free lunch).


If we follow suit, where will the Canadians go to get timely care??

Like i said free healthcare is not possible since our government won't be able to afford to pay for our glutinous country's healthcare.

We spend on average $6800+ per capita. Canada and most other countries with equal to better healthcare spend half of that!

We care about healthcare more? your kidding right? We do have the best quality of cancer care. However, Overall healthcare quality is arguably better in Canada and many other socialized european countries.

"Life expectancy in the U.S. is lower when compared with Japan,Switzerland, Canada and Australia
Infant morality rates in the U.S. is higher than most OECD countries. In 2006, it was 6.7 per live births relative to OECD average of 4.7
The proportion of daily smokers has fallen the most (> 50%) between 1980 and 2007 in the U.S. due to public awareness and high taxation
Obesity rate among adults is the highest in the U.S. in the OECD countries at 34.3% in 2006. Higher obesity rates leads to higher health care spending in the future"

"In the World Health Organization's rankings of health care system performance among 191 member nations published in 2000, Canada ranked 30th and the U.S. 37th, while the overall health of Canadians was ranked 35th and Americans 72nd."


Like i said we have a BROKEN system. However, we cannot afford "free" healthcare. Our obesity is a big issue that needs to be addressed.
please read
http://seekingalpha.com/article/146992-comparing-u-s-healthcare-spending-with-other-oecd-countries
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/w...fe-expectancy-ranks-near-bottom-78769577.html

Also have you ever spoken to any canadians if they prefer their own healthcare system? Most surveys have found over 80% of Canadians approve of the Canadian system and only 8% wanted the U.S System (probably those in the healthcare profession 😀

 

[SoulinNeed]

Are you kidding me? Im assuming your just another clueless med student who is clueless about any other field except your own. Lawyers are making **** nowadays. Look on some Law school forums. Lawyers are at an abundance today like never before, with less and less jobs to go around. Unless you get into one of the top 20-30 schools in the country and graduate top 50% from those schools you get jobs paying 50-60k if your lucky. Now these schools are insanely competitive to get into.

Now most people don't get into these schools. the other 70 schools in the top 100 are still good schools but big firms hire from the t14 of law schools. In this economy grads from Fordham in the top 50% have been deferred, which means you were not hired but you may have an offer a year from now. BTW the top 30 or so schools require lsat scores of over 90%+ and even than its no guarantee. At least as a doctor you know you will get a residency somewhere and a decent paying job. **** i have friend who graduated near the bottom 50% of their classes but still got decent residencies.

Now imagine if your in the bottom 50% of your class from a school out of the top 30 (like cardozo, brooklyn law school, rutgers, SJU; etc all good schools) You have just paid 150k+ to get a 50-60k job if your LUCKY.

Law schools seats are abundant. There are over 200 law schools in the country! Most schools have 200+ seats!

Like i said for every doctor complaining he's going to lose $100k in income there are people losing jobs or getting paid 30-50k. And these are people with professional degrees!

You're right. Hell, it's even worse than you make it. If you graduate from a top 20-30 law school, you need to be top 10% to even have a shot at big law. People in top 14 are having problems right now, too.

 

[Shasan546]

You're right. Hell, it's even worse than you make it. If you graduate from a top 20-30 law school, you need to be top 10% to even have a shot at big law. People in top 14 are having problems right now, too.

Thank you! finally someone who nows what they r talking about in med. And yeah your absolutely right. T14 grads have hard time with jobs too. THose $100k jobs are non-existent these days and probably will not return.

a good read is "The Death to Big Law"

 

[JaggerPlate]

The title of this thread should be changed to: 'Maintaining careers because of Scott Brown ?'

 

[TopQuark]

The title of this thread should be changed to: 'Maintaining careers because of Scott Brown ?'

Don't you mean: "Maintaining careers becuse of Scott Brown"

You'd think people would at least check spelling when they titled a thread, geesh.

 

[JaggerPlate]

Don't you mean: "Maintaining careers becuse of Scott Brown"

You'd think people would at least check spelling when they titled a thread, geesh.

Hahahahah. Of course, how foolish of me.

(didn't even notice that until now)

 

[TopQuark]

Are you kidding me? Im assuming your just another clueless med student who is clueless....

Fine, I surrender. Your mountain of unsourced facts has defeated me. I'm clueless about law school, and so are the 40,000 law students pursuing this degree(your numbers, 200+ seats at 200+ schools). If not in the top 10% of their top 10 school, they should quit. I'll send out the memo tonight.

 

[TopQuark]

Like i said free healthcare is not possible since our government won't be able to afford to pay for our glutinous country's healthcare...

Hopefully you didn't spend too long trying to find the stats to fit your argument because I didn't read them. I stopped after the first paragraph and skimmed the rest. I've tried to stick to the philisophical side of the debate since I don't care to read articles/stats cherry picked by someone trying to argue on an anonymous forum, and I don't expect my opponent to either. I doubt you've even read all the posts in this thread.

I'll thus concede to you again. Congrats sir, you have won the day! The WHO is unbiased and knows best. Their stats need no factchecking or critical analysis. The US system is broken. I will join the masses fleeing this repressive, digusting country. I hope there is a space on the next raft to Cuba. Or Oman, Morocco, Colombia, or Saudi Arabia; I believe they all ranked higher. Someone should have told the Saudi king that his country has such a better system, he could have saved the trip to the US.