universal healthcare & pathology

[Towelie]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Trust me, I'm not idealistic. And I never said that money is not important. I have a family to support like most others, and money is definitely important to me. But you have to be an idiot if you go into medicine expecting to make $500K+ per year. I would be happy with 200.

You can mention long-term consequences as much as you want. But look at the situation now, with millions of uninsured and even more underinsured. I work in the inner-city every day, and see this first hand. You should too. Regardless of what you think about universal healthcare, you must know that the current system has to change.

 

[Gut Shot]

That would make them totally worthless figures, only used for sensationalism and shock value....

A 56% increase is a 56% increase, especially considering that overhead isn't increasing proportionally. It beats the **** out of an 11% decrease.

 

[Gut Shot]

Yeah unfortunately Norway doesnt have millions of migrant workers with bizarre, untreated tumors and infections....lucky them.

True. I'm sure Norway spends 65% of what the US spends per capita because 4% of our population is illegal.

 

[DarksideAllstar]

Technically that is what 'sin tax' is atleast supposed to cover.. but all that sweet alcohol and cig tax gets spent elsewhere...

Sort of like road tax and tolls going to for things other than roads...

Since when does a sin tax cover a Royale with Cheese?

 

[CameronFrye]

The "people" shouldnt be choosing anything other than where to patronize.

Do the "people" choose the price of their latte at Starbucks or what their monthly cable bill will be??

If I charge too much, the "people" can go elsewhere, my fees are public domain.

Its called a FREE MARKET.

And NO Towlie I dont want to do drugs with you.

And I dont even have kids....go away, your opinions lack basis in reason.

better yet go read about capitalism on wikipedia.

Well, technically, medicine has not been a free market since the AMA became a powerful force in the early 20th century. Before that, medicine in this country truly was a free market: anyone could practice, there was competitive pricing, etc...

Anyone with some free time should read "The Social Transformation of American Medicine". It was published in 1984, but it's not really that dated. It explains why our health care system developed differently from Europe and why health insurance developed the way it did in the US. The beginning of the book is a little dense, but the rest of the book is fairly easy to read. Even if you disagree with some parts of the book, I think it's still very interesting.

 

[Playmakur42]

I watched my g/f's grandmother in Canada die from colon cancer. She had to wait for her check-ups, so the disease had already progressed. Then, she had to wait to get a surgery date as the cancer spread. I don't know if she would have lived had the care been faster, but she certainly would have had a better chance. I know it's an isolated incident, but it is telling....

Just stop by any facility that has government employees and watch them work. Then, stop by a facility in the same industry in the private sector and tell me who, as a whole, is more competent, efficient, and industrious.

 

[Gut Shot]

I watched my g/f's grandmother in Canada die from colon cancer. She had to wait for her check-ups, so the disease had already progressed. Then, she had to wait to get a surgery date as the cancer spread. I don't know if she would have lived had the care been faster, but she certainly would have had a better chance. I know it's an isolated incident, but it is telling....

That's funny, I watched a friend's mother move to Canada because her prospects for long term care in the US were so bad. She had Pick's disease, and if she opted for nursing home care here it would have drained her estate until she qualified for state-run institutional care. Woohoo. In Montreal she received very good care in a small nursing home until she died, and her two children were able to hang on to their inheritance.

 

[Gut Shot]

Just stop by any facility that has government employees and watch them work.

See, right here. Right here is where it becomes evident that, like a fourth grader expounding upon the topic of sex, you really don't know what you're talking about. Universal coverage does not equate to government run medicine. Never has, and thank God, it never will.

 

[ermonty]

See, right here. Right here is where it becomes evident that, like a fourth grader expounding upon the topic of sex, you really don't know what you're talking about. Universal coverage does not equate to government run medicine. Never has, and thank God, it never will.

Yes, they are not the same thing. But what is the next step? We start with universal coverage, until politicians rant-n-rave that the government could save money by just owning/operating the health systems. It's the slippery-slop...

Personally my low income / self-employeed parents struggle to pay for health insurance. And while they like the thought of having the help from a universal coverage system, they oppose it. Why? Because like many red-state Americans they believe this country was well founded and never intended to become an entitlement state. If you are injured or sick you can go to the ED and receive treatment regardless of your ability to pay; beyond that you are not owed craddle-to-grave entitlements.

 

[Playmakur42]

That's funny, I watched a friend's mother move to Canada because her prospects for long term care in the US were so bad. She had Pick's disease, and if she opted for nursing home care here it would have drained her estate until she qualified for state-run institutional care. Woohoo. In Montreal she received very good care in a small nursing home until she died, and her two children were able to hang on to their inheritance.

Maybe her kids want to donate their inheritance so he can get his knee done since the universal health care dollars he paid taxes for his whole life were utilized to make take care of their mom.

I can't believe you have the audacity to use an example of someone stealing healthcare in defense of your point.

 

[Thrombus]

See, right here. Right here is where it becomes evident that, like a fourth grader expounding upon the topic of sex, you really don't know what you're talking about. Universal coverage does not equate to government run medicine. Never has, and thank God, it never will.

Government run medicine equates to NO INCENTIVE to provide quality care. It is a disaster and you will end up with a slew of unmotivated employees.

You communist utopians want to turn back the clock to the stone age and devalue all currency and productivity. It is a recipe for disaster and I dread the day when we all get turned into indentured servants of the state (well, some would argue we are already there).


FREEDOM!!!!!!

 

[Vaderize]

There's nothing "wrong" with making 200k a year if you start in your twenties.

However, when you're over 35 and have the same amount of debt to pay off, as well as a family to support, then dropping salaries make one look bitter.

And hey, why is it so inherently evil for the healthcare system in the US to be capitalist? Just about every other thing is, and as LaDoc has stated, some people want to pay a premium for premium service. They have that right.

Basic coverage is a fine goal, but it has to be done realistically. Expecting MD's to work for 100k or less in their current situation simply because someone thinks it might be good for "95%" of the population (? on where that figure comes from) is silly, because it just won't happen.

The free market is not a bad thing when it comes to health care.

 

[DarksideAllstar]

Because like many red-state Americans...

Generalize much?

 

[Towelie]

There's nothing "wrong" with making 200k a year if you start in your twenties.

However, when you're over 35 and have the same amount of debt to pay off, as well as a family to support, then dropping salaries make one look bitter.

And hey, why is it so inherently evil for the healthcare system in the US to be capitalist? Just about every other thing is, and as LaDoc has stated, some people want to pay a premium for premium service. They have that right.

Basic coverage is a fine goal, but it has to be done realistically. Expecting MD's to work for 100k or less in their current situation simply because someone thinks it might be good for "95%" of the population (? on where that figure comes from) is silly, because it just won't happen.

The free market is not a bad thing when it comes to health care.

I agree with everything in this post. I don't think it's evil for the healthcare system to be capitalist, or for doctors to be bitter about dropping salary. However, LaDoc has posted that he's making well over 500K per year, so I think he needs to shut up. If you are purely driven by money, then medicine is the wrong field.

I do think that basic coverage should be a goal, and it is a goal that cannot be accomplished by a purely capitalist system. The healthcare system SHOULD be mainly capitalist, so long as there is a way to get all people the basic access that they need.

I pulled the 95% figure out of my a$$. A system like those that exist in Europe or Canada would probably be better than our current system for a substantial majority of Americans, though (maybe 70%, could be as high as 90-95%).

 

[Thrombus]

I hope I and every other pathologist can figure out how to make MILLIONS during our careers.

I believe that we can outspend the government dollar for dollar (actually my one dollar against their 10 dollars) in giving value back to health care and charity for the needy.

The government is a JOKE in running its welfare system and anyone who subscribes to any anti-capitalist notion refuses to acknowledge this in their thinking.

I have seen hospitals built on philanthropy and hospitals built by the government. I have seen health care delivered by private systems and delivered by government systems. I have seen doctors, nurses, and lab techs employed by private systems and government systems. As we all have -- and it is not even CLOSE in what the end-product becomes. I would rather DIE than get health "death" care delivered to me by some of these government systems. Unfortunately, the masses have no idea what is being "given" to them.

 

[dutchman]

Trust me, I'm not idealistic. And I never said that money is not important. I have a family to support like most others, and money is definitely important to me. But you have to be an idiot if you go into medicine expecting to make $500K+ per year. I would be happy with 200. You can mention long-term consequences as much as you want. But look at the situation now, with millions of uninsured and even more underinsured. I work in the inner-city every day, and see this first hand. You should too. Regardless of what you think about universal healthcare, you must know that the current system has to change.

Watchout. At this rate, you are not going to make anything close to 200K. You need to fight for your own and stop assuming the politicians have your interests in mind. These are dangerous times, and if you fall asleep, you might just wake up to a gang rape.

 

[Towelie]

Watchout. At this rate, you are not going to make anything close to 200K. You need to fight for your own and stop assuming the politicians have your interests in mind. These are dangerous times, and if you fall asleep, you might just wake up to a gang rape.

What do you base this on? The most extreme surveys that I've seen show doctors' salaries decreasing 7% over the last decade, after accounting for inflation. Given that the average specialist makes over $230K, I don't think 200 is an unreasonable goal in private practice.

 

[Gut Shot]

Government run medicine equates to NO INCENTIVE to provide quality care. It is a disaster and you will end up with a slew of unmotivated employees.

You communist utopians want to turn back the clock to the stone age and devalue all currency and productivity. It is a recipe for disaster and I dread the day when we all get turned into indentured servants of the state (well, some would argue we are already there).


FREEDOM!!!!!!

Nice rant. Who are you talking to, again?

 

[Thrombus]

Nice rant. Who are you talking to, again?

You!

I consider you a communist Utopian.

 

[Gut Shot]

You!

I consider you a communist Utopian.

Then you're committing the logical fallacy of false dichotomy.

I consider you intellectually impoverished.

 

[sirus_virus]

If you were wondering what the worst case scenerios are for socialized medicine check these out.

http://www.acponline.org/journals/impact/spring97/strike.htm

"For example, in Israel in 1983, a doctor had to work 70 hour per week to earn as much as a nurse working for 40 hours under the socialized system of medicine."

http://www.ncpa.org/health/pdh36a.html

"Canada's universal health-care system -- which features price controls and health care rationing by waiting --- is generating a wave of strikes. Physicians complain they are overworked and underpaid."


Gut shot, feel free to jump all over the dates of those incidences, but the fact is that they happened under socialized healthcare.

 

[LADoc00]

I wouldnt call Canadians true communists as much as neo-Marxists with mild communist tendencies.

But there a ton of true communists in Europe, maybe not Soviet-style Stalinists, but individuals and groups who represent a real threat to the free world.

Socialism a vastly bigger threat than religious fundamentalism, yet we are in Iraq. Just in terms of numbers, Socialists in the 20th century murdered more people than the combined 1,000 prior years of religious infighting. In terms of sheer brutality, nothing the human race has ever faced compares to iron claw and hammer of Socialist doctrine.

Universal healthcare is one more step to the destruction of the Constitution.

 

[Frumps]

http://www.acponline.org/journals/impact/spring97/strike.htm

"For example, in Israel in 1983, a doctor had to work 70 hour per week to earn as much as a nurse working for 40 hours under the socialized system of medicine."

http://www.ncpa.org/health/pdh36a.html

"Canada's universal health-care system -- which features price controls and health care rationing by waiting --- is generating a wave of strikes. Physicians complain they are overworked and underpaid."
.

Its funny, I don't see how physicians (or future MDs) on this forum can not see how this would happen. I could see how the general public could be misled....I mean, if the government offers free care for all, why wouldn't the general public be for it. But we as physicians should be able to forsee the future implications.

And Towlie, if you think all physicians make over $200,000 then you are in for a suprise....if the government has a say in it, specialists won't make that either.

 

[DarksideAllstar]

Its funny, I don't see how physicians (or future MDs) on this forum can not see how this would happen. I could see how the general public could be misled....I mean, if the government offers free care for all, why wouldn't the general public be for it. But we as physicians should be able to forsee the future implications.

And Towlie, if you think all physicians make over $200,000 then you are in for a suprise....if the government has a say in it, specialists won't make that either.

Can we move this thread to the sociopathic forum?

 

[Gut Shot]

Gut shot, feel free to jump all over the dates of those incidences, but the fact is that they happened under socialized healthcare.

Okay, let me be very explicit about my beliefs, so all the mouth-breathers will get off my back.

I'll begin with my pet peeve of equating universal coverage with government control. They're not the same. Government control could be used to implement universal coverage, but there are myriad other policy options to achieve the same end without direct government interference. It's really pretty simple. Get it? Good.

As for Canada, my point isn't that Canada's healthcare system rocks. Clearly it sucks. What is funny, however, is that many people in the US would be better off under the Canadian system. This indicates to me that our system suck even worse. It doesn't just suck, it also blows, because for the amount that is spent we could give every man, woman and child in the nation "Cadillac care" and still have enough to drive home in an SL-class.

And yet here you all sit, content with getting dicked by the insurance companies and paralyzed by the policy Boogey Men. Way to go.

 

[yaah]

Who are all you people? I realize a lot of people recently changed their usernames and some of you may be regulars, but it isn't always that obvious. If this thread is still rambling onto unrelated tracks tomorrow I am going to move it.

 

[Towelie]

I wouldnt call Canadians true communists as much as neo-Marxists with mild communist tendencies.

But there a ton of true communists in Europe, maybe not Soviet-style Stalinists, but individuals and groups who represent a real threat to the free world.

Socialism a vastly bigger threat than religious fundamentalism, yet we are in Iraq. Just in terms of numbers, Socialists in the 20th century murdered more people than the combined 1,000 prior years of religious infighting. In terms of sheer brutality, nothing the human race has ever faced compares to iron claw and hammer of Socialist doctrine.

Universal healthcare is one more step to the destruction of the Constitution.

I'm trying to understand this. We live in a world where terrorists attack within the United States, unstable countries like India and Pakistan have nukes, and where the middle east is becoming more and more difficult to control. And the biggest threat to the free world is communists in EUROPE? Seriously?

 

[djmd]

Who are all you people? I realize a lot of people recently changed their usernames and some of you may be regulars, but it isn't always that obvious. If this thread is still rambling onto unrelated tracks tomorrow I am going to move it.

Lock it down Yaah!
Towelie's "terrorists attacking the us" (the new using "nazi" in a comment) means the conversation is over.

Seriously, lock it down. We are cross-linked and its just going to be tires spinning from here on in...

 

[sirus_virus]

Yaah, sorry for crashing your joint. I am now really interested in how all this will affect pathologists. I always believed that pathologists and radiologists have benefited from defensive medicine. In a socialized system I believe defensive medicine will almost certainly disappear(especially if the government becomes the malpractice insurers too). Guys, do you think there will be a reduction in ordered tests under such a system?

BTW, this same logic applies to a lot of specialists, as I believe there will be a reduction in the number of referals and consultations.

 

[djmd]

Don't get defensive medicine and preventative medicine confused.

Defensive medicine is just CYA for lawsuits. Preventative medicine is doing appropriate screening test and check up. If UC/Crohn's patients need biopsies to rule out Cancer that isn't defensive that's preventative.

 

[sirus_virus]

Don't get defensive medicine and preventative medicine confused.

Defensive medicine is just CYA for lawsuits. Preventative medicine is doing appropriate screening test and check up. If UC/Crohn's patients need biopsies to rule out Cancer that isn't defensive that's preventative.

Hence is your conlusion that socialized medicine will not reduce the amount of work available to pathologists? Or pathologists never benefited from defensive medicine?

 

[Vaderize]

Hence is your conlusion that socialized medicine will not reduce the amount of work available to pathologists? Or pathologists never benefited from defensive medicine?

It's not a question of whether or not they will have work, it's a question of whether or not they will get paid the same salary no matter how much work they do.

With Uncle Sam as the sole payer, the odds of capitation become astronomically high; look at what Medicare has done to antibody panels in the last year alone if you think I am over-dramatizing.

 

[sirus_virus]

It's not a question of whether or not they will have work, it's a question of whether or not they will get paid the same salary no matter how much work they do.

With Uncle Sam as the sole payer, the odds of capitation become astronomically high; look at what Medicare has done to antibody panels in the last year alone if you think I am over-dramatizing.

I dont think you are overdramatizing. Resident doctors are government employees, look at how well they get payed. That is probably a preview of what socialized medicine will be like.

 

[DarksideAllstar]

I dont think you are overdramatizing. Resident doctors are government employees, look at how well they get payed. That is probably a preview of what socialized medicine will be like.

I was under the impression that the fed govt paid each hospital something crazy like $100K/yr/resident. Hospitals, being the greedy bastards they are, basically take that and give you like 40% of what they make off your ass. I think its less a function of what the government gives and more that the hospital makes a ****load of money off of you.

 

[sirus_virus]

I was under the impression that the fed govt paid each hospital something crazy like $100K/yr/resident. Hospitals, being the greedy bastards they are, basically take that and give you like 40% of what they make off your ass. I think its less a function of what the government gives and more that the hospital makes a ****load of money off of you.

Not to mention that resident doctors generate a whole bunch of revenue on top of that, so hospitals probably gain about 150K per resident. That is the crap that make me wanna kick someone in da nutz.

 

[EUA]

Not to mention that resident doctors generate a whole bunch of revenue on top of that, so hospitals probably gain about 150K per resident. That is the crap that make me wanna kick someone in da nutz.

Funny this comes up. We were just discussing this at lunch today. I knew resident salaries were paid by Medicare, but I honestly didn't know it was that much. Cha-ching!

Anyway, I love this thread, and I love LADoc and Vaderize for bringing some reason into this argument. I don't even really need to say anything, as they have already said everything I would have, alebit in a far more eloquent manner.

Why does everyone automatically find a libertarian train of thought to be crazy? Does it become any less valid of an option because Ayn Rand sold a billion books about it? Hell, the Bible's sold a few more copies than the Fountainhead, and no one's writing that shinola off as pop culture drivel quite yet...

 

[Farles]

I wouldnt call Canadians true communists as much as neo-Marxists with mild communist tendencies.

But there a ton of true communists in Europe, maybe not Soviet-style Stalinists, but individuals and groups who represent a real threat to the free world.

Socialism a vastly bigger threat than religious fundamentalism, yet we are in Iraq. Just in terms of numbers, Socialists in the 20th century murdered more people than the combined 1,000 prior years of religious infighting. In terms of sheer brutality, nothing the human race has ever faced compares to iron claw and hammer of Socialist doctrine.

Universal healthcare is one more step to the destruction of the Constitution.

I think someone watched "Red Dawn" a few too many times 😱

My only 2 cents would be that I would hope (by some miracle of common sense) that the government would go after the pharm industry and their 20% profit margins before completely screwing us. Also, I think that people should be taxed based on their BMI and have that money go towards shoring up the healthcare system 😀