socialized medicine

[allendo]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I was speaking with a local D.O. the other day and he told me to be conservative with my loan money due to the fact that he thinks U.S. medicine will b/c socialized in the near future! I want opinions on this I checked out the Canadian incomes and they are not that bad! Do you think if the U.S. converted would our income be considerably different?

 

[docbill]

don't need to post twice. Maybe leave the one in allopathic forums. You will get more traffic there.

 

[puddlejumper]

The U.S. will not socialize medicine anytime soon. Socialized medicine is a concept that sounds good, but doesn't work. Could you imagine the government in charge of healthcare? Look at the poor state of Medicare and Medicaid. If John Kerry had been elected, then we could worry about our futures, but thankfully that didn't happen. I wouldn't worry about your loans. It's not like you can avoid taking them anyway.

 

[OSUdoc08]

I was speaking with a local D.O. the other day and he told me to be conservative with my loan money due to the fact that he thinks U.S. medicine will b/c socialized in the near future! I want opinions on this I checked out the Canadian incomes and they are not that bad! Do you think if the U.S. converted would our income be considerably different?

If you haven't noticed, the country is becoming more and more "red."

The blue states are slowly fading, and Republicans now control most of the government. This trend will increase, not decrease.

There will not be a trend for socialized medicine, no matter what any Democratic D.O. thinks. In fact, we are moving toward just the opposite.

 

[stomper627]

This thread should be closed or moved to the lounge....there are multiple threads with the same topic going in the lounge....I suggest checking those out.
stomper

 

[Old_Mil]

Regardless of recent voting trends, I'm not so sure that medicine won't be socialized in the US. Despite having a Republican House and Senate, the federal government hasn't appeared to reduce its appetite for expansion, spending, and control of many aspects of life. Of course, the appetite people have for getting something "for nothing" is endless. With no end in sight to the malpractice and liability problem on a national level, socialized medicine may be inevitable.

Canada, despite having higher taxes than the United States, has half as many government workers per capita than the U.S. The end result of this is that much more of their tax money can be leveraged to provide benefits for the middle class. For example, Canada has better roads, post offices, airports, customs and immigration stations, etc - by far - than we do here in America. They also have a much more reasonable legal system.

While I would like to think that this trend would not hold true in a comparison of socialized medicine in the U.S., I see no reason why it wouldn't.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Regardless of recent voting trends, I'm not so sure that medicine won't be socialized in the US. Despite having a Republican House and Senate, the federal government hasn't appeared to reduce its appetite for expansion, spending, and control of many aspects of life. Of course, the appetite people have for getting something "for nothing" is endless. With no end in sight to the malpractice and liability problem on a national level, socialized medicine may be inevitable.

Canada, despite having higher taxes than the United States, has half as many government workers per capita than the U.S. The end result of this is that much more of their tax money can be leveraged to provide benefits for the middle class. For example, Canada has better roads, post offices, airports, customs and immigration stations, etc - by far - than we do here in America. They also have a much more reasonable legal system.

While I would like to think that this trend would not hold true in a comparison of socialized medicine in the U.S., I see no reason why it wouldn't.

The only way we would ever take a step towards is would be if we had both a democratic congress and democratic president.

 

[trypto82]

Republicans 🙄

 

[Tristero]

Regardless of recent voting trends, I'm not so sure that medicine won't be socialized in the US. Despite having a Republican House and Senate, the federal government hasn't appeared to reduce its appetite for expansion, spending, and control of many aspects of life. Of course, the appetite people have for getting something "for nothing" is endless. With no end in sight to the malpractice and liability problem on a national level, socialized medicine may be inevitable.

Canada, despite having higher taxes than the United States, has half as many government workers per capita than the U.S. The end result of this is that much more of their tax money can be leveraged to provide benefits for the middle class. For example, Canada has better roads, post offices, airports, customs and immigration stations, etc - by far - than we do here in America. They also have a much more reasonable legal system.

While I would like to think that this trend would not hold true in a comparison of socialized medicine in the U.S., I see no reason why it wouldn't.

You are wrong for many reasons, among them, the marked prevalence of special interest groups in American politics, and basic neoconservative ideology, which is basically what the Bush administration has been moving to. While the government has been expanding in some areas, such as national security and the military, I guarantee you that the republicans would never propose something as ludicrous as socialized healthcare. Theyre already talking about privating social security--and thats a much smaller burden than Medicare. Also, the amount that taxes would needed to be raised to cover the insurance shortfall at this point is incredible. Many people believe we are beyond the "point of no return" regarding switching our system to fully socialized model. Of course, you won't hear this from physicians for a national health plan, but that's because they're delusional, as you seem to be? The Democrats failes to pass Hillarycare in 1993/94, and it was a disaster for them politically. They lost control of Congress, and there is no way, barring a complete Democratic takeover of Congress, that socialized healthcare in our lifetimes.

 

[Static Line]

I was speaking with a local D.O. the other day and he told me to be conservative with my loan money due to the fact that he thinks U.S. medicine will b/c socialized in the near future! I want opinions on this I checked out the Canadian incomes and they are not that bad! Do you think if the U.S. converted would our income be considerably different?

The fact is that right now many people hear terms like "health care for everyone" or "free health care" or "socialized medicine" and are completely clueless, but enticed by the idea. The idea sounds okay, but when we can look at the various socialized health care systems around the world today, and see how broken they are, and how out of order they function, then people will wake up. The AMA and so many other organizations will come out of the wood-work, the campaigning to educate the average American that You, as a patient, will loose much of your decision making power to some government bureaucrat, most likely not a physician, about your own health care will be relentless. Who cares what you and your physician want to do for your health, the government doesn’t, and that option will scare too many voters. On the other hand, this happens somewhat today with HMO's and other insurance companies; however, put it in the hands of some little public H.S. graduate who thinks the federal government owes them their job, and you will see the biggest boon-doggle in American history. Ultimately, many more voting Americans will run from this idea just like they did 10 years ago, and the politicians are not willing to let that happen again. Simply, it just doesn't work.

 

[DrB]

If you haven't noticed, the country is becoming more and more "red."

The blue states are slowly fading, and Republicans now control most of the government. This trend will increase, not decrease.

There will not be a trend for socialized medicine, no matter what any Democratic D.O. thinks. In fact, we are moving toward just the opposite.

It's just a case of contact dermatitis... Rub some education on it, stay away from red meat and call me in the morning. 🙄

-DrB

 

[Old_Mil]

The only way we would ever take a step towards is would be if we had both a democratic congress and democratic president.

Maybe. Maybe not. First, I'm not in favor of socialized medicine at all.

However, look at the trends. Employers are cutting employee benefits further with every passing year. The defined benefit pension plan has gone the way of the dinosaur. Employees are paying an ever larger % of the cost of their insurance every year and some companies simply refuse to offer health benefits. I see nothing that is going to cause these trends to end.

For the past 30 years we've been engaged in a quality of life shell game that has been concealed by the arrival of the two-income family and the widespread use of consumer debt.

Health care coverage is one aspect of the quality of life that, unfortunately, a lot of people don't think about. While people will more than likely go along with the privatization of social security because of the widespread use of 401ks and IRAs these days I don't think the same argument can be extended to say that medicine won't be socialized.

Eventually, people will demand it and the powers that be will have no choice but to listen (regardless of party affiliation).

 

[CA2008DO]

The real problem with socializing medicine is that it denies a basic principle that is irreversible: health care is not a right but a scarce good and as such is subject to the laws of economics. I do not say this to be cold and unfeeling. This is just the way it is. The sooner politicians and the general population recognize this fact, the sooner we can actually come up with plans that will actually improve the health of the country. Ideas like health savings accounts that can roll over from job to job and year to year are a first step towards empowering individuals to start taking responsibility for their own health rather than relying on HMO's or the government. The sooner people start taking responsibility for their own decisions (e.g. smoking, lack of exercise, poor diet), the sooner they will realize the impacts their decisions have on the quality of their lives and ideally, inspire them to make better choices.

 

[DrB]

The real problem with socializing medicine is that it denies a basic principle that is irreversible: health care is not a right but a scarce good and as such is subject to the laws of economics. I do not say this to be cold and unfeeling. This is just the way it is.

This is not the problem with socialized medicine... this is the problem with capitalistic medicine.... the solution is socialized medicine. Yes health care should be a right... no it should not be a "scarce good".... lets start thinking outside the box.

-

 

[jonb12997]

This is not the problem with socialized medicine... this is the problem with capitalistic medicine.... the solution is socialized medicine. Yes health care should be a right... no it should not be a "scarce good".... lets start thinking outside the box.

-

yes, it "should" be a right, but untill big business stops being in control (HMO, PPO, etc.) then the laws of economics will have the ultimate reign... and it will continue to be a "scarce good" as you call it.

 

[Old_Mil]

The real problem with socializing medicine is that it denies a basic principle that is irreversible: health care is not a right but a scarce good and as such is subject to the laws of.

Nobody wants to hear this. Everyone is too busy voting themselves rights at the expense of the national treasury to be bothered with such details.

 

[beastmaster]

You can sell any idea if it is disguised properly. The political Left just hasn't figured out how to do it with medicine. They are experimenting with "universal coverage" and various incoherent references to "the rest of the developed world." We have to wait and see how this will play out. The current trend is toward a considerable government and special interest influence in healthcare industry (each preventing the other from total control, although the prospect for collusion is disenchanting). The groups fighting for a free-market in medicine are not very powerful, but the groups resisting socialized medicine are.

 

[Fantasy Sports]

Just another thought, but if I were a DO I would oppose socialized medicine on additional grounds other than just the huge salary drop.

Remember, in a socialized system, the government takes over physician recruitment. They will likely have to induce a physician shortage to keep costs low for the government (since no one wants to pay taxes), and the government will probably only provide enough residencies so that the big academic med centers will survive while the community programs would probably not get funded.

So possibly the worst thing that can happen to you guys is to support socialized healthcare as a DO, because the government is more likely to only keep around the public medical schools (so TCOM, etc would survive as well as the allo publics), and then the elite privates (Harvard, Hopkins, etc).

 

[CA2008DO]

This is not the problem with socialized medicine... this is the problem with capitalistic medicine.... the solution is socialized medicine. Yes health care should be a right... no it should not be a "scarce good".... lets start thinking outside the box.

-

It is still a scare good in socialized medicine. Ask any Canadian how long they have to wait to get an MRI. I would like to reiterate that health care is a COMMODITY. A government-run health care system would do nothing other than make it a government-run scare good. And really, when was the last time the government did a good job with anything?

 

[Hernandez]

Regardless of recent voting trends, I'm not so sure that medicine won't be socialized in the US. Despite having a Republican House and Senate, the federal government hasn't appeared to reduce its appetite for expansion, spending, and control of many aspects of life. Of course, the appetite people have for getting something "for nothing" is endless. With no end in sight to the malpractice and liability problem on a national level, socialized medicine may be inevitable.

that's not entirely true, the government has actually been decreasing in recent years, I'll link my source if I can find it,

 

[Pemulis]

The OP's question wasn't "is socialized medicine a good idea?" It was, "do you think it will happen, and if so, what will the impact be for docs?"

The answer to the first question: I have no idea, and neither does anybody else. But don't assume (like a lot of people on this board) that just because America is very "red" right now, that it will always be so. In 1964, the Repubs got their a**s handed to them in the general election, LBJ won a landslide, and American entered probably its most socialistic public policy phase in its history. Nobody then would have predicted that a mere 16 years later Ronald Reagan would be elected. Rememer too that, prior to FDR, only 2 presidents had been Democrats since the civil war. So, politics can change quickly and sharply in this country, and as history is always cyclical, I'm sure it will again at some point in our lives. With that in mind, and with the fact that by 2010 it is estimated that 40% of the population will be self-employed or working outside of the traditional job-with-benefits paradigm, we may well see a swell of public demand for socialized medicine. If this happens....

To answer your second question: yes, it would be worse for us, no question. Hopefully, part of the "deal" that would be made would include a certain amount of debt forgiveness, since we're going to school on the current paradigm of "borrow to your eyeballs, then earn a large salary". But don't count on it. We may well end up with reduced salaries and high debts.

On the other hand, another path entirely could emerge, and its possible that the docs of the future will be wealthier than ever.

In the end, nobody knows what the future will bring, so follow your heart and take things as they come. Whatever happens, doctors will never starve; their work will always be needed, and (except for radiologists and a few other fields) they can't be outsourced.

 

[medicine1]

Perhaps you should move to Canada, Germany, or some other country. I have been to Europe, and I know plenty of Canadians, and they would be more than happy to tell you that Socialized medicine is slow, unproductive, and ******ed. Many Canadians move to the U.S. to find work because they can still make more money, while paying for a $300.00/month health insurance payment, than having half of their earnings taken out in Canada. To see total socialized medicine, go to Great Britian, and ask the doctors and the general population there, what they think about their overall health care.
Thousands of years ago, there were no physicians with high tech equipment, where every society was blessed with a physician because every human being had a right to "Health Care." And humans have survived...did we need doctors, as we Americans claim? Physicians of today are a product of our economic growth. Medicine has always been a privilege and always will be.
There are still many countries that do not have the medical resources that we have.
What about those people? Is it not a privilege that Americans have cutting edge medical equipment and better schools than those who live in other countries?

 

[Shinken]

(Thank you, I needed that! Laughter is indeed the best medicine)

 

[beastmaster]

that's not entirely true, the government has actually been decreasing in recent years, I'll link my source if I can find it,

You won't find a source. The "rate of growth" occasionally slows, but overall expansion does not.

Socialized anything is a tragedy wherever it occurs.

 

[puddlejumper]

Just another thought, but if I were a DO I would oppose socialized medicine on additional grounds other than just the huge salary drop.

Remember, in a socialized system, the government takes over physician recruitment. They will likely have to induce a physician shortage to keep costs low for the government (since no one wants to pay taxes), and the government will probably only provide enough residencies so that the big academic med centers will survive while the community programs would probably not get funded.

So possibly the worst thing that can happen to you guys is to support socialized healthcare as a DO, because the government is more likely to only keep around the public medical schools (so TCOM, etc would survive as well as the allo publics), and then the elite privates (Harvard, Hopkins, etc).

I don't think the US will have a socialized system anytime soon, but if they did, it's arrogant of you to think that only large MD schools would stay around. Most of the DO schools are private and therefore don't rely on government funds to opperate. Secondly, there's no way the government could "induce a shortage" of physicians. There already aren't enough rural family practice doctors in the world. Regardless of costs, there's no way the government could neglect huge sections of our rural populations.

 

[Fantasy Sports]

I don't think the US will have a socialized system anytime soon, but if they did, it's arrogant of you to think that only large MD schools would stay around. Most of the DO schools are private and therefore don't rely on government funds to opperate. Secondly, there's no way the government could "induce a shortage" of physicians. There already aren't enough rural family practice doctors in the world. Regardless of costs, there's no way the government could neglect huge sections of our rural populations.

Its not really that arrogant of me, since I have a feeling my school might be shut down too...

And yes, DO schools are private, and so are some lesser private MD schools too. But since the government controls hiring in a socialized system, they can effectively shut down any number of schools such as to attain a steady state of physicians.

Governments by their very nature induce a shortage of critical services. Don't believe me? Take a look at France, where they don't have enough residencies for their graduating medical students (another way the government can keep down numbers of docs) such that students had a nationwide protest. And there are nowhere near as many docs as necessary to serve the population in France, but there is no competition so there is no increase.

I think it is foolish to think that the government will, after taking on the costs of healthcare and trying to slash them to remain within the budget, will do anything to increase the number of physicians. At least currently, hospitals that train physicians make money and devote that towards education. That would not happen in a socialized system, which is why the number of residencies/doctors will likely go down. And as I said, there is a possibility the govt would only hire doctors from X schools.

I mean, it is all conjecture, but based on what has happened in other countries with socialist medicine, it could happen here if such a system is adopted. That is why I dont think it is likely (for other reasons), but it is another reason to oppose it.

 

[cooldreams]

The latest news:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=578&u=/nm/20050202/ts_nm/health_bankruptcy_dc&printer=1

Half of Bankruptcy Due to Medical Bills -- U.S. Study

Wed Feb 2, 4:29 AM ET

By Maggie Fox, Health and Science Correspondent

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Half of all U.S. bankruptcies are caused by soaring medical bills and most people sent into debt by illness are middle-class workers with health insurance, researchers said on Wednesday.

Photo
AP Photo



The study, published in the journal Health Affairs, estimated that medical bankruptcies affect about 2 million Americans every year, if both debtors and their dependents, including about 700,000 children, are counted.

"Our study is frightening. Unless you're Bill Gates (news - web sites) you're just one serious illness away from bankruptcy," said Dr. David Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School (news - web sites) who led the study.

"Most of the medically bankrupt were average Americans who happened to get sick. Health insurance offered little protection."

The researchers got the permission of bankruptcy judges in California, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Texas to survey 931 people who filed for bankruptcy.

"About half cited medical causes, which indicates that 1.9 to 2.2 million Americans (filers plus dependents) experienced medical bankruptcy," they wrote.

"Among those whose illnesses led to bankruptcy, out-of-pocket costs averaged $11,854 since the start of illness; 75.7 percent had insurance at the onset of illness."

The average bankrupt person surveyed had spent $13,460 on co-payments, deductibles and uncovered services if they had private insurance. People with no insurance spent an average of $10,893 for such out-of-pocket expenses.

"Even middle-class insured families often fall prey to financial catastrophe when sick," the researchers wrote.

Bankruptcy specialists said the numbers seemed sound.

"From 1982 to 1989, I reviewed every bankruptcy petition filed in South Carolina, and during that period I came to the conclusion that there were two major causes of bankruptcy: medical bills and divorce," said George Cauthen, a lawyer at Columbia-based law firm Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP.

"Each accounted, roughly, for about a third of all individual filings in South Carolina."

He said fewer than 1 percent of all bankruptcy filings were due to credit card debt. "That truly is a myth," Cauthen said in a telephone interview.

Cauthen said he was not surprised to hear that so many of the bankrupt people in the study were middle-class.

"Usually people who have something to protect file bankruptcy," he said. "The truly indigent -- people that we see on the street -- there is no relief that we can give them."

Dr. Steffie Woolhandler, a Harvard associate professor and physician who advocates for universal health coverage, said the study supported demands for health reform.

"Covering the uninsured isn't enough. We must also upgrade and guarantee continuous coverage for those who have insurance," Woolhandler said in a statement.

She said many employers and politicians were pressing for what she called "stripped-down plans so riddled with co-payments, deductibles and exclusions that serious illness leads straight to bankruptcy."

 

[DrB]

"Our study is frightening. Unless you're Bill Gates (news - web sites) you're just one serious illness away from bankruptcy," said Dr. David Himmelstein, an associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School (news - web sites) who led the study.

"Most of the medically bankrupt were average Americans who happened to get sick. Health insurance offered little protection."

Thank you for the post cooldreams... As you can see medicine1 our system is not the "American Dream" you are going to protect. We shouldn't be so delusional as to think a system connected to socialism is evil. This debate has been rehashed at nausea in the Lounge. I am not worried that a system that could improve the lives of the sick in this country may result in my decreased income or even the closure of my school. If this comes to pass then I may have to live with never becoming a physician or taking much longer to get there. I may also have to live with a decreased income but all these things are small sacrifices in the face of righteousness.

 

[cooldreams]

i do think this story brought home some scary facts, but i would like to know what illnesses brought about a sudden need to spend 15000 or whatever on stuff that insurance would not pay for. i thought a typical plan would pay for about 80%... if that is the case, then that is like 75000 brought on by an illness... costs that are incidental and abnormal. it seems strange to me.

 

[DrB]

I also want to add this post from the Everyone Forum by Ken Elder

Let me point out a couple of things. I grew up in Canada, though I live and practice in the United States. And no, I did not leave to escape the evil socialized medicine. I married an American girl and she didn't want to live in Canada.

I am not going to advocate a Canadian style system here in the USA, but it's important to point out a couple of things.

1: The streets in Canada are not littered with dead Canadians who died waiting for CABG.

2: Canada spends 9% of it's GDP on healthcare. The USA spends 14% and STILL has 40 million uninsured.

3: The number of doctors and nurses in the USA rose 11% from 1977 to 1997. In that same time, the number of health care administrators went up 2600%. (twenty six hundred percent.) How can anyone argue that THAT is an efficient use of money? The head of Blue Cross last year made 15 million in salary. Want to guess what the head of medicare made? I fully appreciate that government programs are not always the most efficient, but I will tell you it's waaaaay less than 15 million.

4: Medicare (that is to say GOVERNMENT funded health care) has a 98% participation rate amongst those elibigle. If "government" funded health care is so horrible, why do you think that is?

5: Canada does NOT have "national health care." It is a series of health plans administered by the provinces (read states) though a significant portion of the funding comes from the federal government.

6: Every doctor that I knew in Canada lived a very very comfortable lifestyle. Probably more so than here in the USA. WHile it's true that they probably made on average less than here, they worked a lot less hours.

KEN

 

[DrB]

i do think this story brought home some scary facts, but i would like to know what illnesses brought about a sudden need to spend 15000 or whatever on stuff that insurance would not pay for. i thought a typical plan would pay for about 80%... if that is the case, then that is like 75000 brought on by an illness... costs that are incidental and abnormal. it seems strange to me.

I think there is a cap on how much insurance will pay for. They will pay "up to" 80% but there is always a long fine print. I am not an expert on insurance however I have heard of insurance companies refusing paying for treatments that they decide was not necessary... and this after the patient went through the treatment.. guess who gets the bill.

 

[medicine1]

From my own experiences, and from the people I talk to, I know that socialized medicine already exists in America, but to a limited extent. If you are old, or if you make under a certain amount of money the government will pay for your health care coverage. Also, the military has socialized medicine; these are many options to choose from. If you don't like it here you should either leave, join the military, get old, and or you can simply work at McDonalds. Medical care has and will always be a privilege.
You can work at a state ran trauma center, where they take any case, who cater to the indigent. DrB, if you want to provide health care coverage for little to no fee, do it and see what happens. You will be used and abused, and you yourself will go bankrupt.