Obama and Health Care

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
What do you mean by "chill?" Do you mean that people who disagree with his policies should just be quiet and take it? I didn't see the left doing that for the last 8 years.

It's also important to note that if Obama's tax policies become reality which is likely as he has congress on his side your taxes as an attending will be much worse than they are now. So 15-20 years to pay off those debts will increase to 20-30 or 30-40.

Chill means to calm down - as I am sure you know. This thread is hostile and not conducive to mature discussion. Of course, responses to my post prove that. I'm allowed to have an opinion.

I am also capable of using a calculator. Your estimates are grossly exaggerated.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Chill means to calm down - as I am sure you know. This thread is hostile and not conducive to mature discussion. Of course, responses to my post prove that. I'm allowed to have an opinion.

I am also capable of using a calculator. Your estimates are grossly exaggerated.

....Yep...prepare to get owned by logic physicians and actual medical students.
 
Chill means to calm down - as I am sure you know. This thread is hostile and not conducive to mature discussion. Of course, responses to my post prove that. I'm allowed to have an opinion.

I am also capable of using a calculator. Your estimates are grossly exaggerated.

Well let's do the math:
You want to go into primary care so let's start with a modest primary care salary of $150K-$175K.

Average cost of VCOM is roughly 60K per year (32K tuition plus 25K living as per the VCOM website) coming to a grand total of $240,000 of debt.

For a 15 year loan this is from one of the financial aid websites: "It is estimated that you will need an annual salary of at least $255,652.80 to be able to afford to repay this loan. This estimate assumes that 10% of your gross monthly income will be devoted to repaying your student loans. This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 0.9. If you use 15% of your gross monthly income to repay the loan, you will need an annual salary of only $170,435.20, but you may experience some financial difficulty.This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.4. "

30 year It is estimated that you will need an annual salary of at least $187,754.40 to be able to afford to repay this loan. This estimate assumes that 10% of your gross monthly income will be devoted to repaying your student loans. This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.3. If you use 15% of your gross monthly income to repay the loan, you will need an annual salary of only $125,169.60, but you may experience some financial difficulty.This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.9.


Even at 30 years you are still not at their ideal earnings range.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Oooh the anguish! How can I possibly live on a salary that is only between $150,000 and $200,000? How can I possibly be expected to pay back my debt, which is identical to those who currently make that same salary or less in primary care? Oh, the horror! Now I can only afford one vacation house and two luxury vehicles!

Seriously though, get over yourself. Neither Obama, nor anyone in his administration, have set a hard limit as to how much a specialist should, or would, be paid. Sure, they may take a hit, but even if it were a 10% pay reduction, a large majority of specialists would still bring home over $200,000. Current PCPs pay off their debt, live a great life, and are happy in their practices, by and large, and they make around the $150,000 mark.

alturist filth
 
Oooh the anguish! How can I possibly live on a salary that is only between $150,000 and $200,000? How can I possibly be expected to pay back my debt, which is identical to those who currently make that same salary or less in primary care? Oh, the horror! Now I can only afford one vacation house and two luxury vehicles!

Seriously though, get over yourself. Neither Obama, nor anyone in his administration, have set a hard limit as to how much a specialist should, or would, be paid. Sure, they may take a hit, but even if it were a 10% pay reduction, a large majority of specialists would still bring home over $200,000. Current PCPs pay off their debt, live a great life, and are happy in their practices, by and large, and they make around the $150,000 mark.

Ignorance at its very finest....

Point #1. There are precious few examples of "salaries" in medicine. Throwing income figures and averages out there and portraying them as salaries is fallacious. Every clinical setting eventuates in payment based upon revenues and costs.

Point #2. Any changes will likely result in greater than a 10% cut in pay. A 10% cut in reimbursement (and even that is conservatively suspect) will result in a greater than 10% reduction in net.

Point #3. PCP's have higher than average rates of dissatisfaction in private practice.

Point #4. It is not comfortable servicing 250k in student loan debt, plus mortgage, transportation, children, etc on $200k/year, much less 150k/yr. To state otherwise implies lack of experience on the matter (and an underlying tendency towards being mathematically challenged).
 
Ignorance at its very finest....

Point #2. Any changes will likely result in greater than a 10% cut in pay. A 10% cut in reimbursement (and even that is conservatively suspect) will result in a greater than 10% reduction in net.

Just to expand on this point:

Lets say a doctor charges say $100 for a certain appointment. Very little of that actually goes into his pocket. The doctor uses that reimbursement to pay for everything and everyone in the office. So a significant amt of that goes to paying fixed costs of rent and equipment, salaries of staff like billing, front desk staff and of course nurses. Let's say 60% goes to those fixed costs- I have no idea if this is accurate.

In our example a 10% reduction in reimbursement is actually a 25% cut in pay. In 1 year that is pretty drastic.


So apparently there is a 21% cut supposed to happen in 2010. Using the above example the 21% cut would represent a 52% cut in pay
 
With all due respect... your views will change once you are a few years ahead of where you are now (assuming that you are not independently wealthy currently). When the time comes that you are servicing your debts, sitting down with financial advisors doing retirement projections, starting a family, etc -- it is only at that point that you begin to realize that it takes a fair chunk o' change to accomplish said goals. Oh, and before I forget -- to "chill" is imprudent when one is actively seeking to restrict your earning potential in the name of social justice, subjecting one class of people to the indentured servitude of others.... BHO sucks for several reasons, but his biggest suck factor for me at this point centers squarely upon his intent to rape my earning potential.

Physician careers are very finite; when one is thirty when they enter the workforce and work in excess of 80 hours a week the candle has a relatively short life. One cannot wait "15-20 years" for the ship to right itself (assuming that the clown at the helm has not sunken it over that time period, an assumption that is suspect at best). As far as the whole "other careers offer better pay" argument -- what is the problem with someone choosing a career that afford(ed) the opportunity to help others, make a difference, while earning a high wage? Nothing. What is wrong with subjecting providers to an oppressive system whereby they are forced to work for a nonnegotiable binding rate? Everything.

:boom:

Wow, this was so great... You really need to beat this into most everyone on the pre-allo board. I'm not sure at what point pre-meds are indoctrinated to think that the privilege alone of being a doctor is enough to pay off the loans, but this was well written.
 
Ignorance at its very finest....

Point #1. There are precious few examples of "salaries" in medicine. Throwing income figures and averages out there and portraying them as salaries is fallacious. Every clinical setting eventuates in payment based upon revenues and costs.

Point #2. Any changes will likely result in greater than a 10% cut in pay. A 10% cut in reimbursement (and even that is conservatively suspect) will result in a greater than 10% reduction in net.

Point #3. PCP's have higher than average rates of dissatisfaction in private practice.

Point #4. It is not comfortable servicing 250k in student loan debt, plus mortgage, transportation, children, etc on $200k/year, much less 150k/yr. To state otherwise implies lack of experience on the matter (and an underlying tendency towards being mathematically challenged).

I wasn't going to post anything until i saw the Reagan quote. wow, talk about hypocrisy. someone who claims to recognize "ignorance at its finest" revealed his own extreme disinformation. And I'm not saying this because I'm democrat, please don't make me gag. Both the political parties of the US represent the same policies of torture, war, and dishonesty.

There is hardly any democracy or freedom to be found these days. For example, why isn't there any real discussion about a single-payer system in Washington? It is what the majority of people want. If this were a democracy, everyone would have had access to health care a long time ago. So please don't try to define freedom and democracy when you are so blind to reality yourself.

And frankly, I find it shameful that salaries and such are being debated at a time when thousands of families are going bankrupt because of medical bills. How selfish to bring up mortgage and transportation when patients are foreclosing their properties. This is the real problem, not student loans and such.

If you are seriously worried about an income, then watch the pbs frontline special on health care - you will see that physicians abroad DO pay off their debts and live comfortable lives. Maybe not in a waterfront estate with 2 BMWs and a yacht, but comfortably.

I don't get it, why did you all want to work in a field serving people, if only to separate yourself from them at the end of the day?

The brainwashed American mentality is sad to see.
 
I wasn't going to post anything until i saw the Reagan quote. wow, talk about hypocrisy. someone who claims to recognize "ignorance at its finest" revealed his own extreme disinformation. And I'm not saying this because I'm democrat, please don't make me gag. Both the political parties of the US represent the same policies of torture, war, and dishonesty.

There is hardly any democracy or freedom to be found these days. For example, why isn't there any real discussion about a single-payer system in Washington? It is what the majority of people want. If this were a democracy, everyone would have had access to health care a long time ago. So please don't try to define freedom and democracy when you are so blind to reality yourself.

And frankly, I find it shameful that salaries and such are being debated at a time when thousands of families are going bankrupt because of medical bills. How selfish to bring up mortgage and transportation when patients are foreclosing their properties. This is the real problem, not student loans and such.

If you are seriously worried about an income, then watch the pbs frontline special on health care - you will see that physicians abroad DO pay off their debts and live comfortable lives. Maybe not in a waterfront estate with 2 BMWs and a yacht, but comfortably.

I don't get it, why did you all want to work in a field serving people, if only to separate yourself from them at the end of the day?

The brainwashed American mentality is sad to see.

You are correct about one thing in your post, and that is when you admit you are a liberal Democrat.

What right do you have to tell someone how much money they should earn.

What if I don't want to live comfortably? What if I want to buy that lamborghini diablo?

What right do you have to tell me how much I should be able to charge people for my medical services?

The reason why the US is the best country in the world, is because there is endless opportunity to make as much money as you want if you are good at what you do.

When you stifle this freedom, people become lazy. Why should I work hard when the government will give me everything. Look at what is happening to California to see this first hand.
 
And frankly, I find it shameful that salaries and such are being debated at a time when thousands of families are going bankrupt because of medical bills. How selfish to bring up mortgage and transportation when patients are foreclosing their properties. This is the real problem, not student loans and such.

If you are seriously worried about an income, then watch the pbs frontline special on health care - you will see that physicians abroad DO pay off their debts and live comfortable lives. Maybe not in a waterfront estate with 2 BMWs and a yacht, but comfortably.

I don't get it, why did you all want to work in a field serving people, if only to separate yourself from them at the end of the day?

The brainwashed American mentality is sad to see.

People already have access to health care. They just have to pay for it and that is a concept that you just dont agree with.

Personal responsibility is something that this country has completely forgotten about. People want a system where they dont have to pay a dime and shift the cost and responsibility onto someone else.

This is a similar situation for most of those getting foreclosed upon in the subprime market so I am glad kapiolli brought it up. You should set up your finances so that if something happens to the economy, you're still safe. If you are stretching your last penny to afford your house, then in all reality, you cannot afford that house. So the loan officer gave you the money... so what? It was still your call and you didnt leave yourself a large enough cushion. You get foreclosed upon there is no one to blame but yourself! Everyone knows the economy can go south. And it sucks if you lose your job. This still does not excuse you from bearing the brunt of the consequences for your choices.


As to the notion of doctor's salaries- what doctors get paid is a very minor amt of the cost of medical care. Furthermore, why should I be a martyr for the cause when a 50% reduction in my salary is barely going to even make a dent in the cost of a hospital stay?
 
What right do you have to tell someone how much money they should earn.

this is actually a good point. What other private system is the gov't intervening to say how much an individual can get paid?

Why aren't lawyers' fees subject to gov't control? That is much more closely tied to an inalienable right- the right to liberty.
 
If you want a national single payer system I have a plan that I would be A-OK being implemented by the gov't. It has certain restriction which include:
1) If you currently smoke or use drugs you are kicked out for 2 years. This has a 3 strikes and you're out policy.

2) If you are obese by body fat measurements (not BMI) and not elderly or handicapped then you are excluded- and not the I'm-too-fat-to-walk-around-so-i-use-a-motorized-scooter-and-get-to-park-at-the-front-of-the-walmart type of handicapped.

3) If you didn't finish high school or get a GED and are of adult age you are excluded.

4) If you are non-compliant with treatment and not because of side effects you are kicked out

5) Only US citizens, those with green cards or those who pay taxes are eligible

If we did this i guarantee not only would our populace be much, much healtier, they would be smarter too. It would drastically cut costs too. You would see a tremendous decline in the next 10 years of lung, kidney bladder, breast, colon, cervical, penile, esophageal, head and neck, and stomach cancers just to name a few.

Hypertension, obesity, type II diabetes, Obstructive sleep apnea, high cholesterol, myocardial infarction, peripheral vascular disease, coronary artery disease, strokes, COPD, asthma exacerbations, arthritis in large joints would be drastically diminished. This is quite possibly the best thing the govt could do- force people to either pay for their health care or actually live a healthy lifestyle. This way it affords people the freedom to do as they please but doesnt force me to actually pay for their stupid lifestyle.
 

:slap:

OK, so you choose to ascribe to the belief that socialism is the ideal construct.... where the good of society always outweighs the good of the individual, even if it comes at a detrimental cost to the individual. Every society, generation, and walk of life have to deal with their own group of self-righteous Robin Hood's, I suppose. I believe that the medical contribution to bankruptcy proceedings is largely on top of a long list of either poor decisions or bad luck, or some combination of the two, and has been largely politicized for the furthering of the nanny state cause.

"The People" should not be allowed to abuse their democratic powers to enslave a segment of its citizenry, which is the end result of a single payor system for anyone currently in the system. The remainder of your argument is equally ignorant, because no one is buying "waterfront estates" and anything other than used entry level BMW's on 175-250k/yr.

On a personal note, I don't give two sh**s what you find shameful. We made the decision to pursue a life helping others, not being servants unto them. This decision came at significant (and understood) costs, along with the understanding that there would be a set of rewards commiserate with those risks and costs in the out years. What I find shameful is the shirking of personal responsibility and the desire to lay said responsibility at the feet of others, including the government. You and your individual loathing comrades actively seek out to remove both the floor from imprudence and the ceiling from responsible behaviors.

Go back to the pre-Allo kiddie pool please.
 
Last edited:
Members don't see this ad :)
The only way to have a single payor system that would work is to allow balance billing. Then what have we solved.
 
MOHS, I have a serious question for you.

Why are most of the medical students naive liberals?

I am seriously interested, what makes these people have such a short-sighted naive view of not only medicine, but the world in general?
 
MOHS, I have a serious question for you.

Why are most of the medical students naive liberals?

I am seriously interested, what makes these people have such a short-sighted naive view of not only medicine, but the world in general?

It's a function of their age and point in life; a reflection of the lack of experience. It's natural, well documented, and, some would argue, good to a certain extent. It was the case when I went through (not for me, of course, which caused some to frown upon my views; when we were finishing up residency these very same people who looked down upon my views, thoughts, etc were asking me for advice / opinion on job offers, etc).

They will not appreciate the fact that "the evil folks" like myself are the ones who were always looking out for their, and their families', best interests all along... including when they were too naive, illusioned, and short sighted to do so.
 
I wasn't going to post anything until i saw the Reagan quote. wow, talk about hypocrisy. someone who claims to recognize "ignorance at its finest" revealed his own extreme disinformation. And I'm not saying this because I'm democrat, please don't make me gag. Both the political parties of the US represent the same policies of torture, war, and dishonesty.

There is hardly any democracy or freedom to be found these days. For example, why isn't there any real discussion about a single-payer system in Washington? It is what the majority of people want. If this were a democracy, everyone would have had access to health care a long time ago. So please don't try to define freedom and democracy when you are so blind to reality yourself.

And frankly, I find it shameful that salaries and such are being debated at a time when thousands of families are going bankrupt because of medical bills. How selfish to bring up mortgage and transportation when patients are foreclosing their properties. This is the real problem, not student loans and such.

If you are seriously worried about an income, then watch the pbs frontline special on health care - you will see that physicians abroad DO pay off their debts and live comfortable lives. Maybe not in a waterfront estate with 2 BMWs and a yacht, but comfortably.

I don't get it, why did you all want to work in a field serving people, if only to separate yourself from them at the end of the day?

The brainwashed American mentality is sad to see.[/QUOTE

Your a Douchebag!
 
when we were finishing up residency these very same people who looked down upon my views, thoughts, etc were asking me for advice / opinion on job offers, etc.

No one was discussing your ability as a physician or resident and I'm sure your advice was well appreciated in that field. Although you maybe knowledgeable and wise when it comes to medicine, you are tremendously childish when it comes to politics.

Maybe after you read a few books (credible books with facts not more disinformation) and watch something other than CNN or Fox News every night (try Democracy Now) maybe then we can carry on a discussion about politics and health care. But right now, all I am responding to is immature, uninformed MDs who should stick to their field.

It's actually been surprisingly funny watching how everyone has reacted.

I believe the system must be reformed at the roots in order to be any real change to health care, and any other policies.

And please don't call me a democrat again. I already explained that both the political parties of the US are promoting policies of torture, war and dishonesty, which I definitely cannot and will not ever support.
 
MOHS, I have a serious question for you.

Why are most of the medical students naive liberals?

I am seriously interested, what makes these people have such a short-sighted naive view of not only medicine, but the world in general?

I've often been interested in that question as well. I think it's because most medical students tend to be introverted and bookish throughout high school. They don't really develop any political identity (or sometimes personal identity) until college. They then seem to pick up whatever is being spoon fed to them (or forced on them, whichever) in college. Universities are very liberal so that's what they pick up. They carry that ideology through to residency as it's never challenged by anything they encounter in academia.

Often in about second year of residency the questions start to emerge. "What is FICA?" "How can I survive after I make my loan payment with after tax money?" "Why should I pay high taxes to support these lazy, non-producers."

But it's not just a question of personal finances. It's not just about cutting loose the non-productive leeches. At some point (for some) there's a realization that continual support of these people just perpetuates the system that allowed their existence in the first place.
 
No one was discussing your ability as a physician or resident and I'm sure your advice was well appreciated in that field. Although you maybe knowledgeable and wise when it comes to medicine, you are tremendously childish when it comes to politics.

Maybe after you read a few books (credible books with facts not more disinformation) and watch something other than CNN or Fox News every night (try Democracy Now) maybe then we can carry on a discussion about politics and health care. But right now, all I am responding to is immature, uninformed MDs who should stick to their field.

It's actually been surprisingly funny watching how everyone has reacted.

I believe the system must be reformed at the roots in order to be any real change to health care, and any other policies.

And please don't call me a democrat again. I already explained that both the political parties of the US are promoting policies of torture, war and dishonesty, which I definitely cannot and will not ever support.


Now that's quite a mouthful... coming from a premed sweating an application. :eyebrow:
 
Last edited:
I'm going to remind everyone to play nice.;)

I will also point out to everyone on both sides that calling people stupid, childish, or d*****bags isn't really an effective strategy for getting your point across. Anyone can debate from whatever perspective they wish, but it needs to remain civil.
 
The problem is that we have designed a system that subjects anyone who doesn't want to be a GP (really anyone who wants to be a doctor at all) to needless psychological, physical, and financial misery for years on end, which of course means that they feel entitled to outlandish salaries to compensate for their pain and suffering, and to be respected as veritable martyrs to healthcare on top of their 500K/year salaries. I agree that within the current insane system that's completely reasonable, but is the current system really necessary?

Becoming an ortho should not involve torture, debt, or lawsuits, and does not in almost any other country. Medical school should be 100% government subsidized including a stipend during the 'graduate education' phase. Residency should be a period of time where you work/study approximately 60 hrs/week recieve a salary commisurate with other technical professionals (think engineers) at a similar point in their careers without being deprived of sleep or a family life...[medicine] should be made into a reasonable profession that people don't need to martyr themselves to, which in turn would mean that they wouldn't feel the need to demand respect beyond common courtesy and the gratitude for a job well done that anyone should recieve

I absolutely agree with this post. I read a recent article in my local newspaper about doctors and how their work lives are actually not as cushy as people seem to think. Then, at the end, they listed the average doctor salaries...anyone feeling bad for doctors and vowing for change certainly wouldn't be too sympathetic after that! People do seem to focus so much on the raw salary numbers, without taking into account the cost (financial, psychological, physical, time, etc.) that goes into it. If you reduce those "costs" by the methods stated above, I, for one, would be fine with a lower salary than the current averages.
 
I absolutely agree with this post. I read a recent article in my local newspaper about doctors and how their work lives are actually not as cushy as people seem to think. Then, at the end, they listed the average doctor salaries...anyone feeling bad for doctors and vowing for change certainly wouldn't be too sympathetic after that! People do seem to focus so much on the raw salary numbers, without taking into account the cost (financial, psychological, physical, time, etc.) that goes into it. If you reduce those "costs" by the methods stated above, I, for one, would be fine with a lower salary than the current averages.

Yet at this point, you for one have never actually done the job. You will find as you move along that this point is more complex than you think. I will also point out that while US physicians have the highest earnings per capita of any nation on earth, this is probably not so true on a work-hourly basis, and it is absolutely not true from a relative salary perspective. You will find that incomes in Britain, Canada, and Japan often rival those in the US. While less, Sweden, France, and others all tend to have reasonable high incomes, especially compared to other members of the population in those countries. Many of these countries pay for medical school. It's more complex than you think.
 
Well let's do the math:
You want to go into primary care so let's start with a modest primary care salary of $150K-$175K.

Average cost of VCOM is roughly 60K per year (32K tuition plus 25K living as per the VCOM website) coming to a grand total of $240,000 of debt.

For a 15 year loan this is from one of the financial aid websites: "It is estimated that you will need an annual salary of at least $255,652.80 to be able to afford to repay this loan. This estimate assumes that 10% of your gross monthly income will be devoted to repaying your student loans. This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 0.9. If you use 15% of your gross monthly income to repay the loan, you will need an annual salary of only $170,435.20, but you may experience some financial difficulty.This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.4. "

30 year It is estimated that you will need an annual salary of at least $187,754.40 to be able to afford to repay this loan. This estimate assumes that 10% of your gross monthly income will be devoted to repaying your student loans. This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.3. If you use 15% of your gross monthly income to repay the loan, you will need an annual salary of only $125,169.60, but you may experience some financial difficulty.This corresponds to a debt-to-income ratio of 1.9.



Even at 30 years you are still not at their ideal earnings range.

Is it any wonder why career changers or those of us in their 30's choose a midlevel path vs. medical school? If medical school were free I would pursue that option wholeheartedly, but as it stands I'm already in my 30s, with a family, so pursuing the NP path is the better ROI. I would prefer a PA program (and may still bite the financial bullet on that) but the honest $ ROI is the NP route.
 
I don't get it, why did you all want to work in a field serving people, if only to separate yourself from them at the end of the day?

All professions serve people. Grocery store owners, software engineers, financial advisors, car mechanics - all of them provide an essential good or service to people in exchange for compensation. There is no reason why medicine should be considered uniquely alturistic. At some point, medicine became packaged, for no logical reason, with the idea of selfless servitude - that the only reason to become a doctor is to work for the benefit of others. It's utter bull****. Like I said in my other thread, if your only concern is for the welfare of others, go into social work, be a pro-bono attorney or start a nonprofit. Or open a low cost, walk in, cash only medical clinic- that's a totally viable business model. But don't turn the medical profession into a socialist nightmare just to satisfy your fetish for public service.
 
Last edited:
yo. so what's gonna happen?

obama wants to spend ANOTHER 2143034 trillion to give health insurance to those who don't deserve it.

who's gonna pay?

time to move money to swiss bank?
 
So the 'liberal agends' considers health care a human right, a noble and ideal belief. We need to get people universal and affordable ACCESS to health-care, this much I agree with as health is a necessity for self improvement as is education (which also needs to be noted is relatively accessible but by no means uniform throughout the US). However these beliefs don't seem to acknowledge that in the wake of such reforms the medical profession would martyr itself by continuing to pay the outrageous educational requirements which include: tuition, fees, licensing, not to mention a majority of schools are in or near a city meaning that there are high 'living wages' associated with attending school. Such a plan would require restructuring of the school system in order to maintain competency while reducing debt burden on the students who do not deserve these debts anymore than the inner city person who is trying to attend college to better themselves and their communities (all higher education is way too expensive). This would be an absolute necessity to any program that would actually be feasible if the government plans to change the trends American health trends i.e. 2X the specialists and 1/3 of the PCPs compared to the rest of the world (not exact but close). There is a problem with the America system, but not because people don't have access, instead because to solve the problem we try to invent new PCP's in the form of PAs and NPs (no offense meant). I mean who thought it was a good idea for America to be the only nation (to my knowledge) that licenses three different degrees of medical professionals to administer the same level of care. For my part the three (primarily MD, DO, NP) has a lot to learn from each other and important interactions that enhance care, but instead they have been thrust into competition in an attempt to lower costs at the expense of training, but that is another discussion.

So now we come to my main concern in the liberal argument and that is "America's Arrogance". This statement was thrown around time and time again during the Bush administration, and whether or not it was true I don't understand why it only appears when we talk about international politics but not on our own soil. Are we not arrogant for thinking we can solve a problem that other nations struggle by doing what they do but doing it bigger and better, because we are America? This post was mostly spurred by the liberal media I've been seeing on anti-social health care sentiments raised by the republican party citing issues in Canada and the UK, not to mention France (which is moving away from its socialized system). This is something to consider, liberals and optomists, why would we do any better going to socialized medicine than Canada and the UK which cannot still provide the BEST health care. We should not try to do it better would should try to do it new. This board should not be used to argue based on political platforms it should be for logic and reason and experience to be used as guides for a new system which would provide appropriate care and access while not sacrificing the people administering the care. We are all intelligent people, and medicine is OUR job, do not let it fall to the administrators, politicians and insurers come up with your own f**king ideas thats what this situation needs.
 
Top