• Practice your interview with the new SDN AI Interview Coach. Choose a school, answer by voice or typing, and receive a personalized feedback report. Available now to all SDN members. Try the AI Interview Coach.

Good for you, UK

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Not everyone is comfortable investing in the stock market, and for good reason. You're far better off talking about interest from savings account or our ridiculous 3%+ home loans and not some 9% "average". Cause I've seen what a 9% "average" looks like. It's not a fixed average and it does little to predict the future. It's an average based on the past (obviously). I wonder how many OPEC investors "averaged" +9% this year.
You clearly don't know how to math or invest long term. Your risk aversion will literally be the thing that ruins your shot at having any great deal of prosperity in life. One does not invest in "OPEC." You invest in index funds and let them ride. There will be good and bad years, but the average has never been a negative return for any 36 year period in stock market history, not even close to it in fact.
 
Yeah, that is just awful advice. The 9% average over the course of a career. The only time this doesn't work out is if you want to retire right during a downslope in the market (a la 2008).
Even if you do retire during a downslope, you shouldn't be pulling all of your money out at once- you should be pulling out 4% a year, giving the remaining 96% of your cash a very good shot at recovering and increasing its value. Plus as you come up on retirement, most people don't have a pure market portfolio, they've got a mix of bonds and other more stable investments, so only about half of their portfolio takes a hit and that half will likely recover.

I just don't get people like OP that want the government to take care of them. We're very well off and the last people that should be begging to suck on the tit of the federal government. Sacrificing wealth and potential for 10 less hours of work a week and a little bit of security (albeit a very small amount of security in comparison to that you could obtain by privately saving for retirement) is just bafflingly nonsensical. Why rely on someone else to take care of you when you can take care of yourself even better than they could by a long shot?
 
You've been working extra 10-20 hours/week more in residency, before even seeing real money, so there is that. Even if we assume only extra 10 hours/week in residency, that's 520 more hours per year or 21.6 more days per year that you worked while in residency.

And it isn't double the money, its 1/3 more, which half will end up going towards malpractice insurance anyway.

If you want to go by training hours worked its actually longer in the UK. 5 years at 60 hours a week is 15600 hours, and 80 hours at 3 years is 12480 hours (assuming 52 week work years which is not the case for either country). So factor in the UK has more vacation time (~2 weeks more a year) its still 14100 hours (47 weeks worked 5 weeks vacation) vs 11760 (49 weeks worked, 3 weeks vacation). You work over an extra years worth of hours training in the UK AND you delay making "Real money" by two years. Which when you start to make that "real money" as a GP is about half of what you would have STARTED at in America.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Even if you do retire during a downslope, you shouldn't be pulling all of your money out at once- you should be pulling out 4% a year, giving the remaining 96% of your cash a very good shot at recovering and increasing its value. Plus as you come up on retirement, most people don't have a pure market portfolio, they've got a mix of bonds and other more stable investments, so only about half of their portfolio takes a hit and that half will likely recover.

I just don't get people like OP that want the government to take care of them. We're very well off and the last people that should be begging to suck on the tit of the federal government. Sacrificing wealth and potential for 10 less hours of work a week and a little bit of security (albeit a very small amount of security in comparison to that you could obtain by privately saving for retirement) is just bafflingly nonsensical. Why rely on someone else to take care of you when you can take care of yourself even better than they could by a long shot?

Because Socialism is whats cool now in America, even though most socialist countries in Europe are struggling with a ton of different issues economically and socially. Just because we don't hear about it in the news, doesn't mean those countries are utopias. Go there and talk to people in those countries. A lot of young people in Denmark are fed up with the socialistic tendencies of the government. I was there talking to a few people last summer, they said a lot of the young people are starting to vote more right wing because they're sick and tired of seeing upwards of 80% of their paycheck go to the government in one form or another. Right off the bat if you make over $55k you pay a 60% income tax. You wanna go out to eat in Denmark, 25% VAT, you wanna drive a car? well that's a luxury 180% tax. Let alone the fact that those systems can't even handle small numbers of immigrants, but this is a tangent I can get on and never stop which should probably be saved for another time and place.
 
If you want to go by training hours worked its actually longer in the UK. 5 years at 60 hours a week is 15600 hours, and 80 hours at 3 years is 12480 hours (assuming 52 week work years which is not the case for either country). So factor in the UK has more vacation time (~2 weeks more a year) its still 14100 hours (47 weeks worked 5 weeks vacation) vs 11760 (49 weeks worked, 3 weeks vacation). You work over an extra years worth of hours training in the UK AND you delay making "Real money" by two years. Which when you start to make that "real money" as a GP is about half of what you would have STARTED at in America.

Isn't med school 4-6 years and post med school is 5 years? (According to Wikipedia.) If so they literally save 2-4 years of debt... Either way it's 10 years. In America it's 4+4+3 for internal med so 11 yrs...
 
Isn't med school 4-6 years and post med school is 5 years? (According to Wikipedia.) If so they literally save 2-4 years of debt... Either way it's 10 years. In America it's 4+4+3 for internal med so 11 yrs...

Depends. There are two routes you can go. You can go to straight from high school and its usually 6 years than 5 years of whats basically their residency, or a lot of people do graduate medical programs where they have to get at least a BS first so its 3 years than 4 years med and 5 years just to be a GP. If you want to be any sort of consultant its at least 9 years of post medical school graduation training.
 
Depends. There are two routes you can go. You can go to straight from high school and its usually 6 years than 5 years of whats basically their residency, or a lot of people do graduate medical programs where they have to get at least a BS first so its 3 years than 4 years med and 5 years just to be a GP. If you want to be any sort of consultant its at least 9 years of post medical school graduation training.

Ohh. College is only 3 gears in UK?
 
Isn't med school 4-6 years and post med school is 5 years? (According to Wikipedia.) If so they literally save 2-4 years of debt... Either way it's 10 years. In America it's 4+4+3 for internal med so 11 yrs...
It's 6+5 to be a GP, 6+8 to be many types of specialist, compared to 11 in the US to be an internist or 14 to be a specialist- basically you break even.
 
Ohh. College is only 3 gears in UK?
Most are 3 some are 4. Medical School in the UK doesn't award an MD to the graduates. They grant MBBS or MBBCh degrees, even at the graduate level.

Edit: However, there are some MD granting programs, but most are not.
 
If you look at what a physician earns in the UK and the cost for a British citizen to become one, the ROI for them is higher than for us, especially for those of us at schools geared towards primary care such as Osteopathic medical schools and community based MD schools. I even met a British born doctor in Boston several years ago and he told me the average doctor there only take 2-3 years to pay back their student debts. Some European countries education is completely subsidized by the government such as Denmark.

How do you figure? Even factoring in the max student loan debt with compounded interest at 350-400k approximately, this a 2 year salary of the average physician. Assuming a 5 year payoff, they finish and still have the six figure salary that is 100k more than the UK physician. Over the course of the physicians career that's a 2-3 million dollar ROI in a lifetime DIFFERENCE, in salary!


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
MD is actually a post-graduate degree there that is equivalent to an MD/PhD here.
Yes, you are correct. Most med students in the UK and abroad are limited to being clinicians bc they receive a MBBS which is a Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelors of Surgery. To do research and teach requires a completely different post graduate training track. They have to go through teaching fellowships etc.
 
Yes, you are correct. Most med students in the UK and abroad are limited to being clinicians bc they receive a MBBS which is a Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelors of Surgery. To do research and teach requires a completely different post graduate training track. They have to go through teaching fellowships etc.
Which is yet another reason US physicians win- academic medicine and research is open to us at a much lower barrier. Not only that, but we don't have to wait for a consultant to die or retire to become a full-fledged attending. Great example of what happens when there aren't enough consultant spots available: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/290623.stm
 
i.e.: the fruit of socialized medicine! More work, less money, crappier care.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

There's ZERO evidence that the NHS provides "worse" care. I'm not saying the US doesn't provide better care but rather that the research is either lacking or that the metrics that many use are disputed (especially by many political conservatives).

Do they teach health policy at your medical school? Because you should read up on the subject . . .
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Even if you do retire during a downslope, you shouldn't be pulling all of your money out at once- you should be pulling out 4% a year, giving the remaining 96% of your cash a very good shot at recovering and increasing its value. Plus as you come up on retirement, most people don't have a pure market portfolio, they've got a mix of bonds and other more stable investments, so only about half of their portfolio takes a hit and that half will likely recover.

I just don't get people like OP that want the government to take care of them. We're very well off and the last people that should be begging to suck on the tit of the federal government. Sacrificing wealth and potential for 10 less hours of work a week and a little bit of security (albeit a very small amount of security in comparison to that you could obtain by privately saving for retirement) is just bafflingly nonsensical. Why rely on someone else to take care of you when you can take care of yourself even better than they could by a long shot?
Because the government is stable and will always be there to take care of us!

cough cough, Greece, cough cough
 
First off, you realize that after 19 years, the average CONSULTANT is making only $148,290.93, right? I mean, I know a guy who works two weekends a month in a rural area and makes 200k not even five years out of school, in addition to 250k for his regular job. And that is BEFORE taxes, which are significantly higher there.

I'd rather work harder (10 hours a week) to make substantially more- if you want to have a nice 9-5 life and a meh salary, feel free to hop the pond. As to paying for their children's education, their schools charge tuition as well- Oxford, for instance, is 9k GBP per year and rising, without cost of living and such factored in.
Wow... Is that guy an ER doc?
 
A few more things to consider when discussing the 'socialized' medicine aspect. All of the countries with functioning socialized systems in Europe are a fraction of the size the U.S. is and many of them are far less culturally and medically diverse. The closest country to the U.S. population-wise is Germany, which has a population that is 25% of what the U.S. has. On top of that, several of the countries that were rated to have the "best" healthcare systems by the WHO when the report came out also happen to be countries with terrible economies (France, Italy, Greece, etc.). The countries that can actually pull it off, aka Germany, can do so because they've literally used the system for over 100 years and have had quite some time to work out the major issues or just put their tax rates through the roof. Sure the U.S. could support a socialized system, but we'd see a major decline in the amount of research and innovations created here as well as a likely decline in the quality of care (since we'd have the *****s in Washington taking care of health decisions instead of people that are actually in healthcare).
 
A few more things to consider when discussing the 'socialized' medicine aspect. All of the countries with functioning socialized systems in Europe are a fraction of the size the U.S. is and many of them are far less culturally and medically diverse. The closest country to the U.S. population-wise is Germany, which has a population that is 25% of what the U.S. has. On top of that, several of the countries that were rated to have the "best" healthcare systems by the WHO when the report came out also happen to be countries with terrible economies (France, Italy, Greece, etc.). The countries that can actually pull it off, aka Germany, can do so because they've literally used the system for over 100 years and have had quite some time to work out the major issues or just put their tax rates through the roof. Sure the U.S. could support a socialized system, but we'd see a major decline in the amount of research and innovations created here as well as a likely decline in the quality of care (since we'd have the *****s in Washington taking care of health decisions instead of people that are actually in healthcare).

Immigration is also a huge hindrance to socializing things in America. Denmark started to strip all refugees of their valuables, except wedding rings, in order to help cover the costs. Sweden took in, I believe the number was, 190k refugees and said that if they started to take in anymore their country would collapse. We have more illegal immigrants in our country than the entire population of most of the European countries. There is an estimated 11.5 million people here undocumented, that would be the 11th largest population in Europe.
 
I always find myself thinking that comparing the US to countries like the UK or Germany is absurd. It would be more apt to compare the US to all of western Europe when you are looking at population size, geographic size, and diversity of populations and economies.
And the thing that often gets forgotten: look at their military budgets. You want to know why they don't have to spend much money on national defense and can devote that money other places...
 
Why? I'm curious.

team_primary.jpg
 
A few more things to consider when discussing the 'socialized' medicine aspect. All of the countries with functioning socialized systems in Europe are a fraction of the size the U.S. is and many of them are far less culturally and medically diverse. The closest country to the U.S. population-wise is Germany, which has a population that is 25% of what the U.S. has. On top of that, several of the countries that were rated to have the "best" healthcare systems by the WHO when the report came out also happen to be countries with terrible economies (France, Italy, Greece, etc.). The countries that can actually pull it off, aka Germany, can do so because they've literally used the system for over 100 years and have had quite some time to work out the major issues or just put their tax rates through the roof. Sure the U.S. could support a socialized system, but we'd see a major decline in the amount of research and innovations created here as well as a likely decline in the quality of care (since we'd have the *****s in Washington taking care of health decisions instead of people that are actually in healthcare).

The problem at hand in the US is that this country is moving in the direction of socialized medicine. The ACA has substantially changed the practice of medicine forever, it has increased the number of insured individuals but at the same time created a whole new set of problems. The countries that have socialized medicine also provide heavily subsidized education to their future physicians.

Medical students in Europe and Canada very rarely leave school with the kind of debt burdens that US students have. That is why Bernie Sanders has incredible popularity with so many young people.
 
I'm going to ignore a lot of the terrible replies and assumptions I've gotten to say a few generalized things: medical students in Europe have less burnout, money in Europe goes a lot farther, and people live healthier and longer lives. Make of that whatever the hell you want. This thread has turned into such a Europe vs. U.S. thread, which is sad because I think only a handful of you have actually experienced both.

Oh and @Mad Jack: Index funds hu? Never heard of them... /s
And, you can invest in OPEC since it's publicly traded, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Have fun investing in the market, I'm sure it will make you rich. Only report your gains though, yea?
I almost forgot!--Enjoy the tax bomb (capital gains) on your earnings through the stock market.
 
Last edited:
How do you figure? Even factoring in the max student loan debt with compounded interest at 350-400k approximately, this a 2 year salary of the average physician. Assuming a 5 year payoff, they finish and still have the six figure salary that is 100k more than the UK physician.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

This is a pretty terrible assumption actually. One that I would assume somebody with zero experience in money or life might make.
 
Why? I'm curious.
Because we basically are the Western world's military. Hell, the only reason they can have military budgets as low as they do is that we pick up the slack. If we socialized medicine and all this other crap, either their economies would collapse due to increased military spending, war would result, or their economies would suffer because we aren't out there looking out for their interests and they aren't willing to do so themselves.

People in America forget that the purpose of both our military and our foreign policy is to serve America's interests, often at the expense of other nations. Our interests happen to be aligned with Europe's interests, so they benefit as well. Without our military, however, our interests will fall behind those of nations like China and Russia, and our economy (and the entire West, as well as our Pacific allies) will suffer terribly as a result.
 
Time value of money...you'll do realize that med school over there starts straight out of high school. 5 year medical education, no undergrad+(possible gap yr/yrs)+med school+ residency
 
Time value of money...you'll do realize that med school over there starts straight out of high school. 5 year medical education, no undergrad+(possible gap yr/yrs)+med school+ residency

That means their ROI is even higher for UK students, since US students need to finish a minimum of a Bachelor's degree which is four years, and in many cases students go to graduate school before medical school, so they enter school already in debt.
 
I'm going to ignore a lot of the terrible replies and assumptions I've gotten to say a few generalized things: medical students in Europe have less burnout, money in Europe goes a lot farther, and people live healthier and longer lives. Make of that whatever the hell you want. This thread has turned into such a Europe vs. U.S. thread, which is sad because I think only a handful of you have actually experienced both.

Oh and @Mad Jack: Index funds hu? Never heard of them... /s
And, you can invest in OPEC since it's publicly traded, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Have fun investing in the market, I'm sure it will make you rich. Only report your gains though, yea?
I almost forgot!--Enjoy the tax bomb (capital gains) on your earnings through the stock market.
Well that's one way to do it.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
Oh and @Mad Jack: Index funds hu? Never heard of them... /s
And, you can invest in OPEC since it's publicly traded, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Have fun investing in the market, I'm sure it will make you rich. Only report your gains though, yea?
I almost forgot!--Enjoy the tax bomb (capital gains) on your earnings through the stock market.

If you max out your 401k/IRA and putting 50+k/year in Index Funds, you can basically retire with over $2 mil in 15 years. Most US doc should be able to do that assuming they are not living 'la vida loca' with their salary....
 
I always find myself thinking that comparing the US to countries like the UK or Germany is absurd. It would be more apt to compare the US to all of western Europe when you are looking at population size, geographic size, and diversity of populations and economies.

Or compare it to Russia. I'm sure we'd all love to work in their system...

The problem at hand in the US is that this country is moving in the direction of socialized medicine. The ACA has substantially changed the practice of medicine forever, it has increased the number of insured individuals but at the same time created a whole new set of problems. The countries that have socialized medicine also provide heavily subsidized education to their future physicians.

Medical students in Europe and Canada very rarely leave school with the kind of debt burdens that US students have. That is why Bernie Sanders has incredible popularity with so many young people.

There are certainly perks to medicine over there, but overall I'll take 250k of debt to make 200k+ for the rest of my career along with my better medical education. I've said it numerous times, but if we went to a universal system I'd prefer a 2-tier system that provides basic/preventative care to most or everyone with private insurance still available for chronic conditions and those wanting coverage for expensive emergencies/treatments.

I'm going to ignore a lot of the terrible replies and assumptions I've gotten to say a few generalized things: medical students in Europe have less burnout, money in Europe goes a lot farther, and people live healthier and longer lives.

To the first, I'll take a few years of burnout if it means I'm a superior physician in the end. People's lives and health are worth it. Lol at "money goes a lot farther", that's so general of a statement there's no way to validate it. Are we comparing NYC to Serbia or a midwest city to London? Because those two comparisons yield vastly different outcomes.
 
Last edited:
There are certainly perks to medicine over there, but overall I'll take 250k of debt to make 200k+ for the rest of my career along with my better medical education. I've said it numerous times, but if we went to a universal system I'd prefer a 2-tier system that provides basic/preventative care to most or everyone with private insurance still available for chronic conditions and those wanting coverage for expensive emergencies/treatments.

My thoughts are gravitating to this idea also.
 
I'm going to ignore a lot of the terrible replies and assumptions I've gotten to say a few generalized things: medical students in Europe have less burnout, money in Europe goes a lot farther, and people live healthier and longer lives. Make of that whatever the hell you want. This thread has turned into such a Europe vs. U.S. thread, which is sad because I think only a handful of you have actually experienced both.

Oh and @Mad Jack: Index funds hu? Never heard of them... /s
And, you can invest in OPEC since it's publicly traded, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Have fun investing in the market, I'm sure it will make you rich. Only report your gains though, yea?
I almost forgot!--Enjoy the tax bomb (capital gains) on your earnings through the stock market.
Only fools or very skilled investors try to game the market by investing heavily in specific areas. Unless you're Warren Buffett, don't do it. And of course you pay taxes on earnings, but capital gains are a mere 15%. Compare that top the 50%+ taxes and 15% VAT I'd be paying in Europe and I'll take it any day. As to "investing in OPEC," many OPEC member nations have either government-owned our other non-public oil holdings, such as Iran and Venezuela. There isn't just some OPEC ticker and the vast majority of their holdings cannot be invested in. It's always amusing to me, how people don't understand investing horizons, compound interest, etc despite being intelligent enough to get into medical school- you don't make a net loss until you sell. So if you're buying new and retiring in 38 years, the chances of you losing (and hell, even not gaining substantially) are miniscule. And you only get taxed 15% of earnings when you sell, so it's not really a big deal for buy and hold sellers. The market has tumbles, but your accounts recover if you leave them alone- unlike trusting bankrupt governments like those of Greece and Spain, which can change their deal with you at any time and tend to take decades (if ever) to recover.

Anyway, the whole point is that Americans, in general, don't want what Europeans want. We don't want the government taking care of us when it's already 19 trillion dollars in debt, we don't want to be content with being merely middle class, we don't want to have our options limited in the name of security, etc. You want to be a peasant wage slave your whole life, go get a cushy 9-5 doing physicals for the government. They'll give you pensions and a union health plan and low wages and all the other stuff you so desire. For the rest of us, the ones that want to make well into the six and seven figures, we'll put in the extra effort and time, thanks. It's also interesting that you seem to think we work that much more than our colleagues overseas post-residency lol. Most attending over there are putting in close to 50 hours a week, very similar to most fields here. Are you concerned about working hard for a couple of years of residency to cut your training time in half compared to the alternative? Polls have been conducted in the past asking residents if they would prefer a lengthier, lower hour, European-type system and the answer was a resounding no by a vast majority of residents.

Oh, and as to money in Europe going a lot farther, that's just completely incorrect. The US has some of the lowest consumer goods prices in the developed world. Even our real estate is reasonably priced compared to England. If you're poor, you have less money for consumption her compared to overseas, so such things don't matter, but if you're well paid the US is a consumer's paradise.
 
Time value of money...you'll do realize that med school over there starts straight out of high school. 5 year medical education, no undergrad+(possible gap yr/yrs)+med school+ residency
They also have a much longer training process for residency, and most countries have six year medical schools that integrate two years of undergrad prereqs. Given that must medical schools charge 9k GBP in tuition and that the average Brit makes just north of 30k pre-tax, those are still pretty hefty tuition bills, relatively. And then you've still got to pay to live during those six years. Their 6+5 model is identical in length to our 4+4+3 model, and if you want to be a specialist, cardiology would be 6+8, still equal to our 4+4+3+3 model in length, except you're making about a third of what you would here post-tax for the rest of your life.
 
Bingo! For nearly 70 years the Europeans have been able to afford lots of nice subsidized things because they knew the US was paying for their protection. Actually, for many European countries, their military is just another civil service job. Only their Special Forces units are any good.


And the thing that often gets forgotten: look at their military budgets. You want to know why they don't have to spend much money on national defense and can devote that money other places...
 
I'm going to ignore a lot of the terrible replies and assumptions I've gotten to say a few generalized things: medical students in Europe have less burnout, money in Europe goes a lot farther, and people live healthier and longer lives. Make of that whatever the hell you want. This thread has turned into such a Europe vs. U.S. thread, which is sad because I think only a handful of you have actually experienced both.

Oh and @Mad Jack: Index funds hu? Never heard of them... /s
And, you can invest in OPEC since it's publicly traded, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
Have fun investing in the market, I'm sure it will make you rich. Only report your gains though, yea?
I almost forgot!--Enjoy the tax bomb (capital gains) on your earnings through the stock market.
This read like a reddit personal finance post that got down voted to the very bottom with -123 and you have to purposely click on it to see what abomination of advice someone gave to get slaughtered that badly.
 
My bad - that was a typo I left in while editing.

That said, I still feel that's a reasonable salary for GPs once you factor in the differences between the US and UK, and one with which most could live fairly comfortably. It also doesn't account for the incentives that UK GPs can receive, or that they can go the "private practice" route to earn more if they desire.

More expensive to live in England, and they get taxed a ridiculous amount
Doctors live a middle class life there, I know because I have relatives who happen to be doctors in the U.K. People in business do better..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-leaving-life-sun-Australia-New-Zealand.html
 
Oh and then there are people like me who graduated with little debt (thank you scholarships and gi bill plus va benefits) and who work well under the average work hours (i am actually considered part time by my malpractice so only pay half the usual rate) while still making a lot more than the numbers being thrown around in this thread (i am a surgeon only a few years into my career so would probably still be on junior doc pay over there)
 
Immigration is also a huge hindrance to socializing things in America. Denmark started to strip all refugees of their valuables, except wedding rings, in order to help cover the costs. Sweden took in, I believe the number was, 190k refugees and said that if they started to take in anymore their country would collapse. We have more illegal immigrants in our country than the entire population of most of the European countries. There is an estimated 11.5 million people here undocumented, that would be the 11th largest population in Europe.

It's way, way more than 11.5 million. The government has been using that number since the early aughts, but Ann Coulter demonstrates how this number doesn't come close to the reality in 2016. It's more like 30-40 million+.
 
It's way, way more than 11.5 million. The government has been using that number since the early aughts, but Ann Coulter demonstrates how this number doesn't come close to the reality in 2016. It's more like 30-40 million+.
Yeah, I was using the "official" statistic to highlight how big of an issue it is. The real number is definitely much higher.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
It's way, way more than 11.5 million. The government has been using that number since the early aughts, but Ann Coulter demonstrates how this number doesn't come close to the reality in 2016. It's more like 30-40 million+.
>2016
>Taking a single word out of Anne Coulter's mouth seriously

There is no reputable source that puts the number of illegal immigrants even as high as 15 million, let alone 30-40 million. We've actually had an efflux of illegal immigrants over the past few years because the economy has been so bad.
 
>2016
>Taking a single word out of Anne Coulter's mouth seriously

There is no reputable source that puts the number of illegal immigrants even as high as 15 million, let alone 30-40 million. We've actually had an efflux of illegal immigrants over the past few years because the economy has been so bad.

09:00

 

http://www.politifact.com/florida/s...-trump-says-number-illegal-immigrants-30-mil/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nuing-nearly-decade-long-decline-report-says/

You can listen to a woman that consistently completely fabricates information, or you can listen to data that is corroborated by actual researchers (DHS, PRC, etc). There is zero credible evidence to the contrary, it's sensationalist nonsense. You don't just misplace twenty to thirty million people.

Regardless, the number of illegal immigrants doesn't matter- non-citizens do not (and should not) receive socialized benefits or services in most countries with socialized medicine. If you go to the UK and visit a hospital right now, they hit you with a bill.
 
http://www.politifact.com/florida/s...-trump-says-number-illegal-immigrants-30-mil/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nuing-nearly-decade-long-decline-report-says/

You can listen to a woman that consistently completely fabricates information, or you can listen to data that is corroborated by actual researchers (DHS, PRC, etc). There is zero credible evidence to the contrary, it's sensationalist nonsense. You don't just misplace twenty to thirty million people.

Regardless, the number of illegal immigrants doesn't matter- non-citizens do not (and should not) receive socialized benefits or services in most countries with socialized medicine. If you go to the UK and visit a hospital right now, they hit you with a bill.

We're supposed to believe that the number has essentially stayed the same over the past decade based on the presumed honesty and total compliance of illegal immigrants with surveys on the matter? And practically shove under the rug considerations of birthrates of illegal immigrants?

Please. I put far more stock in reports like this one.
 
http://www.politifact.com/florida/s...-trump-says-number-illegal-immigrants-30-mil/
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/5-facts-about-illegal-immigration-in-the-u-s/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nuing-nearly-decade-long-decline-report-says/

You can listen to a woman that consistently completely fabricates information, or you can listen to data that is corroborated by actual researchers (DHS, PRC, etc). There is zero credible evidence to the contrary, it's sensationalist nonsense. You don't just misplace twenty to thirty million people.

Regardless, the number of illegal immigrants doesn't matter- non-citizens do not (and should not) receive socialized benefits or services in most countries with socialized medicine. If you go to the UK and visit a hospital right now, they hit you with a bill.

Billing them is one thing, collecting the money for the services you provided is a completely different animal. Even say the 11.5 million people is correct, most will not be able to afford the cost of any procedure or treatment they will receive. That cost has to be absorbed and is a much bigger issue here than it is in any other country in the world.