Just curious -- how does "less likely to negotiate" coexist with "literally illegal to pay women less for the same job"? If a practice is literally illegal, what does willingness or skill in negotiating have to do with anything??? 😎
lol c'mon ya know what i meant. you can't pay someone less based on their gender. and anecdotally, speaking from personal experience in management in corporate america, women NEVER asked me for a raise while the guys would ask every performance review.
I know, just busting chops! 😎
Where did the idea of sub 180k salaries being the norm come from?
Look at basically any EU country...UK, Switzerland, Germany, France, Sweden...all countries that are heavily compared to the US by propoents of UHS here. Specialist salaries rarely cross the 170k mark, and throw 50+% income tax on top (granted, I don't know their bracket laws in detail, 50+% is still significant). Also, I'm 19 and the vast majority of my age group (anecdotal, not stats so take with as many grains of salt as you like) is now voting age and prefers comparatively radical policies, I'm telling you I would NOT be surprised to see significant UHS policies and soon the entire system get overhauled into our careers in 10ish years.
This is probably more a sampling bias than an accurate representation of current American attitudes.
Fair, but don't you think it's significant that we just elected someone who proposed major healthcare policies as part of his agenda as well as the fact that democrat control of the house (+plus 48 senate seats) are filled with strong propoents for socialized medicine? That's not to say I don't like their candidacy, I just think we'll see more and more such folks enter office to the point where it's an inevitable transition to UHS.
Regardless of how you stand politically, the election was as much about voting against Trump as it was voting for Biden. Despite the presidential lead, Senate and House are shifting red, which indicates people probably aren't as keen about the radical policies.
What's more likely to happen is having some kind of expanded public service while also having a private option. From there, physicians can chose what they want to cover/earn (obviously if they only see public option patients, reimbursements would probably be lower). Every college student is a super radical leftist, that's what being in college is all about. Fortunately/unfortunately, depending on how you believe, these numbers are never high enough to push to super left policy, and a lot of fiscal political opinions change as they get older (ESPECIALLY physicians who do not want to spend their entire 20's and early 30's not making any money in medicine + 400k loans to only make 150k per year). UHS definitely has some pro's to it, but also lots of cons, and a lot of kinks will need to be worked out in our very productive political system for it to feasible/palatable to enough voting Americans.
That's exactly my fear. I get accused of being an imposter in medicine so often by peers when I mention my lack of interest in American socialized medicine..."how can you be a doctor if you don't support healthcare for all??". I definitely support healthcare for all but I don't think you can have 400k med school, whatever the heck residency is, and then salaries matched by successful landscapers and folks in technical fields. We'd have a huge shortage and I'd probably live my life paying loans. I don't know what the solution is, though. But I still think we'll soon see a huge transition before many realize it's not as glamorous as it seems.
Things in government happen a lot slower than you might think. It's not like they can just flip a switch and make it happen.
College was a wonderful place but I do not miss the bolded. Those conversations really aren't worth having, given how immensely complex the problem is, and honestly if someone is approaching it like that, that's a red flag they wouldn't ever be willing to even honestly debate on it anyways. Conflating good doctor with MFA is definitely a feel-good thing to virtue signal in the PreMed Club of Wherever, but you're right, with loans, opportunity cost, etc, it just isn't that simple. Everyone who is going into a medicine, and I hope most physicians, realize that the system needs to change, but in what way and how remains to be seen. I don't think it will be MFA as its being advertised today. Realizing @athorcommens and I are saying the same things hahaha.
Appreciate the tag team XD
Good points. All I know is I plan to go into ID, already a ticket to massive loans, long education and a respectable but low-for-MD pay. The last thing I want is to lose whatever I do make to very high taxes with no loan reimbursement and see half my colleagues disappear because many do see medicine as a ticket to good pay. Guess I'll sit and see, just stresses me out because I'm nearing the time where I'll have to sign over a quarter million and my left kidney to get my degree
You're 19, don't worry about any of that right now. We'll probably have a new president by the time you are in medical school. I'd tell you not to worry about that other stuff, but you don't even need to think about any of that right now. And by the time you do, it probably won't be as scary. You'll know more and understand the state of things better. So just do well in college and do some cool extracurricular stuff.
Can't say I agree with much of what you said. But to keep things on topic, there are a few other big obstacles for MFA in America.
Oh true, I forgot what the actual original topic was lol
I suspect that, as a female physician in a same-sex relationship, you would be less affected by the social pressures that account for at least part of the medical gender wage gap (eg the pressure on women to be the primary caretaker of children in a hetero marriage). I'm a male, though, so take that guess with a grain of salt. I'd love to hear about female physicians' experiences with this
