What can be done to decrease the disparity between academic pay and private?

[Thrombus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Anyways, Fox was promoting them as a small band of highly motivated people who were hoping to change Washington's spending habits, but they were mostly small minded wingnuts.

Yeah it is real small minded to think that we shouldn't spend trillions of dollars we don't have just to prop up failed banks, unions, and government programs that can't scratch their own arses and which are cancers on the citizenry. Just imagine if someone tried to run his/her small business that way.

Get a grip buddy, those people myself included were standing up against the completely irresponsible, inefficient, and paralyzing US government which is selling our country down the toilet and putting our future generations deeper and deeper in the hole.

 

[LADoc00]

not to get further off topic, but I take tea bagging as a fairly big step in a relationship. Im not out tea bagging and not calling the next day etc. I want to set the record straight on that. As for this Fox news thing, I have no clue what you are referring to but I will research it.

Ladoc out.

 

[2121115]

As you are so passionate, I can only presume that you were protesting the rampant spending and federal debt contributions during Reagan/Bush 41 (tripled the national debt between them), were praising Clinton (added only 40% to the federal debt during his 8 years) and were protesting during all 8 years of Bush 43 (doubled the federal debt despite being left with a budget surplus).

If you did all of these things, then I applaud you and I apologize for making a hasty generalization about the tea baggers. If you found your voice of opposition for the first time in April 2009, then you are a small-minded wingnut who allowed him/herself to be controlled by Fox News and Glen Beck and Bill O' and Sean Hannity.

Game. Set. Match.

 

[2121115]

Jesus..what?! No, you are correct, my point did not revolve around dunking my scrotum into someone's oral orifice...

I've been laughing every time I've heard the "teabaggers" referred to on the news. I'm like "they've got to be kidding", but it wasn't a joke. Why would they call themselves that? 🙂

 

[Thrombus]

I'm not your buddy, friend...(Hopefully that reference will not get lost on those reading.)

I agree with a lot of the sentiments expressed by the protesters, actually. I take it, based on your post, that you are quite passionate about this topic. As you are so passionate, I can only presume that you were protesting the rampant spending and federal debt contributions during Reagan/Bush 41 (tripled the national debt between them), were praising Clinton (added only 40% to the federal debt during his 8 years) and were protesting during all 8 years of Bush 43 (doubled the federal debt despite being left with a budget surplus).

If you did all of these things, then I applaud you and I apologize for making a hasty generalization about the tea baggers. If you found your voice of opposition for the first time in April 2009, then you are a small-minded wingnut who allowed him/herself to be controlled by Fox News and Glen Beck and Bill O' and Sean Hannity.

How about this: I found my voice when Bush43 passed medicare part D and when Bush41 raised the income tax.

I found my voice when Bush43 did the first bank bailout and was supported wholeheartedly by McCain and Obama.

Apparantly you have no idea the mentality of those of us who were protesting and neither does the mainstream media. People in middle America think the federal gov't is way too broad and over-reaching and you of all people being in pathology and medicine should see the effect of bureaucracy coming down from *****s in cubicles who dictate what we do every day and apply broad regulations and rules to specific non-applicable situations.

Obama has brought it to a new level with TRILLIONS of wasted dollars and government takeover of private companies. Now we have invested political capital in these failed banks and other industries which will inevitably give them an unfair competitive advantage for so many reasons including but not limited to inevitable favorable legislation coming from these same corrupt politicians who have their careers invested in the outcome of individual corporations.

Before we wasted billions, now we have wasted trillions while the scope of the federal government increases to all new levels. Both are wrong, and both are opposed by conservatives who organized and attended a peaceful protest after this latest escalation of nothing less than tyranny.

I have a similar question for you -- why did you not show similar disdain for protests put on by corrupt organizations like ACORN strongarming banks into giving out horrible loans in exchange for not getting negative publicity and being labeled "racist"? Do you oppose such in-lobby bank protests and similiarly make fun of those? Or do you only repeat stupid lines and make stupid generalizations from your left wing buddies who have no idea how to relate to middle America?

 

[malchik]

I'm not your buddy, friend...(Hopefully that reference will not get lost on those reading.)

I agree with a lot of the sentiments expressed by the protesters, actually. I take it, based on your post, that you are quite passionate about this topic. As you are so passionate, I can only presume that you were protesting the rampant spending and federal debt contributions during Reagan/Bush 41 (tripled the national debt between them), were praising Clinton (added only 40% to the federal debt during his 8 years) and were protesting during all 8 years of Bush 43 (doubled the federal debt despite being left with a budget surplus).

If you did all of these things, then I applaud you and I apologize for making a hasty generalization about the tea baggers. If you found your voice of opposition for the first time in April 2009, then you are a small-minded wingnut who allowed him/herself to be controlled by Fox News and Glen Beck and Bill O' and Sean Hannity.

I'm no teabagger, but I don't think this logic is . . . large-minded. One only escapes the small-minded wingnut label if one has been 100% consistent with a position for the last 30 years? This kind of argument was resorted to almost to absurdity this past campaign year when candidate A would try to discredit candidate B by pointing out an inconsistency on a position they took 5 years ago. Coming to the right conclusion one day ago doesn't on its own diminish the person, and certainly doesn't relate to whether or not the position is the right one.

 

[Thrombus]

I'm glad you found your voice back with Bush 41. How many protests did you attend from then until April 15, 2009?

The generalizations continue.....Am I to assume that you are a welfare recipient who buys junk food with their food stamps and uses cash to fund their smokes and alcohol purchases because you are obviously a leftist?

Did you miss the 1992 election and see that Bush 41 got beat almost assuredly because he ran from his conservative, small government base and Perot gladly stepped in and took many of those votes?

But whatever -- many of those believe that government governs best when it governs least. I heard that somewhere from someone. The growth of the federal government is nothing short of tyrannical and you should be thankful that there are those of us who oppose it from time to tim.

Good grief, the fed's are about to destroy any and all incentive to enter the field of medicine by taking away our autonomy, and reduce our financial incentives while creating more and potentiating existing regulating agencies that make our lives miserable.

I guess I will assume that you don't have a problem with that -- In the spirit of making assumptions which you demonstrate very well.

 

[yaah]

Back on topic - if payments are bundled wouldn't this also hurt radiology and other specialties? It wouldn't just be pathology.

 

[pathstudent]

Back on topic - if payments are bundled wouldn't this also hurt radiology and other specialties? It wouldn't just be pathology.

Absolutely it will, or at least could. It will be a huge food fight.

 

[yaah]

Absolutely it will, or at least could. It will be a huge food fight.

Right, so my point is that bundling hurts everyone except primary care docs and maybe ER docs. Would hurt surgeons less than others but still hurt anyone who does procedures. So what makes everyone think everyone is going to get behind this except for pathologists?

 

[Dral]

In terms of maintaining salaries, I'd think the safest are those who are either very business savy or those who have options to tailor their practice (surg sub specialties, derm, some IM sub specialties). I guess that's sorta how it is now.

Either way, every time I read one of these threads about comps or jobs on this forum, my desire to pursue Pathology goes down. I should just stop reading this forum, heh.

 

[LADoc00]

Right, so my point is that bundling hurts everyone except primary care docs and maybe ER docs. Would hurt surgeons less than others but still hurt anyone who does procedures. So what makes everyone think everyone is going to get behind this except for pathologists?

Your thinking is muddled a bit. You are correct. NO ONE, not even ER docs would gain anything from this UNLESS...big unless...they are also were part owners in the hospital (which is illegal in CA).

Your typical medical group will basically end up scraping with the hospital and all the other providers groups for their share of the $, which is exactly what that f'ing tw-t Nancy Pelosi wants to happen. She and her f'ing harpies are making this a top legislative priority to BEGIN the healthcare debate but a military analogy to this would be softening up a landing area by pummeling the beach with ship-based artillery (well in this case dropping a nuke right on our heads...).

It will ensure doctors are divided, angry and bitter and the AMA is in effectively in shambles PRIOR to moving a healthcare agenda forward.

IF this goes through, we are doomed, utterly f'ing doomed. Im 110% serious here.

 

[Patholog]

Your thinking is muddled a bit. You are correct. NO ONE, not even ER docs would gain anything from this UNLESS...big unless...they are also were part owners in the hospital (which is illegal in CA).

Your typical medical group will basically end up scraping with the hospital and all the other providers groups for their share of the $, which is exactly what that f'ing tw-t Nancy Pelosi wants to happen. She and her f'ing harpies are making this a top legislative priority to BEGIN the healthcare debate but a military analogy to this would be softening up a landing area by pummeling the beach with ship-based artillery (well in this case dropping a nuke right on our heads...).

It will ensure doctors are divided, angry and bitter and the AMA is in effectively in shambles PRIOR to moving a healthcare agenda forward.

IF this goes through, we are doomed, utterly f'ing doomed. Im 110% serious here.

Already a lot of doctors are operating with razor thin margins and if reimbursement gets cut, enough will just stop seeing Medicare patients, right? Kind of like what was threatened a year or so ago when the 10% reimbursement cuts were about to happen?

As I talked about earlier, and as I know has been posted here before, physician salaries are such a small part of total health care expenditures. Hopefully enough legislators will realize this (but then again, they probably won't). It's kind of akin to claiming to solve rampant government spending by stopping earmarking, which accounts for 2% or so of government expenditures. Won't work.

 

[mcfaddens]

Either way, every time I read one of these threads about comps or jobs on this forum, my desire to pursue Pathology goes down. I should just stop reading this forum, heh.

No you get immune to it after a while, but I would have a backup plan if you want to live well in the future, ie your primary income is not just path. Save some money start a small and manageable side business, this way when the axe drops it wont hurt as much. Im looking into cattle or something sustainable, hey at least ill have fillet for dinner every nite.

 

[2121115]

You guys should have heard the talk radio show I was listening to on the way home yesterday. Caller after caller angry at the greedy doctors who are driving up health care costs. "Its like $100 for an office visit where you see the doctor for 5 minutes." If physician reimbursement is a low percentage of health care costs, we need to start letting someone know or popular opinion of America's voting constituents will turn against us "greedy doctors". Nobody bats an eye if pharmacists at Wal-Mart are making 130k or your dentist is making 300k but god forbid your primary care doc make a similar amount.

 

[pathstudent]

You guys should have heard the talk radio show I was listening to on the way home yesterday. Caller after caller angry at the greedy doctors who are driving up health care costs. "Its like $100 for an office visit where you see the doctor for 5 minutes." If physician reimbursement is a low percentage of health care costs, we need to start letting someone know or popular opinion of America's voting constituents will turn against us "greedy doctors". Nobody bats an eye if pharmacists at Wal-Mart are making 130k or your dentist is making 300k but god forbid your primary care doc make a similar amount.

It is ALWAYS ok to take money from docs in this society.

But is that figure really true that only 1-2% of all healthcare costs are for professional fees? If that is true, there is no reason to decrease payments to physicians. What comprises the other 98%

 

[Dral]

I don't think the average Joe or Josephine understand the concept of how much pain one goes through to even become a physician or even the simple concept of overhead. I mean, private practice nurse and support staff salaries just *poof* appear, right?

 

[stickyshift]

Bundling. That would work out great for my group, given that we can't even get Part A from our hospital admins.
Has anyone observed how the Obama administration dealt with the banking and auto industries? I could easily see Obama whipping up populist outrage at our incomes, making it politically unpopular to protect the earnings of (non-unionized) doctors.
He will not allow himself to be constrained by law, the Constitution, or even fiscal sanity.
We have a madman president.

 

[yaah]

You guys should have heard the talk radio show I was listening to on the way home yesterday. Caller after caller angry at the greedy doctors who are driving up health care costs. "Its like $100 for an office visit where you see the doctor for 5 minutes." If physician reimbursement is a low percentage of health care costs, we need to start letting someone know or popular opinion of America's voting constituents will turn against us "greedy doctors". Nobody bats an eye if pharmacists at Wal-Mart are making 130k or your dentist is making 300k but god forbid your primary care doc make a similar amount.

Too bad no one ever responds with how much of that $100 actually goes to the physician as pay. The problem with the whole argument is that it always comes down to a physician who makes ~$100-120k per year claiming that if reimbursements are cut any further, they won't be able to see patients at all. Then all it takes is a couple of people to start the, "I would love to have to suffer with trying to live on $100k per year!" chorus.

The general public are collectively *****ic - they equate a one year correspondence course with 10+ years of college + med school + residency. Both are extra education. Everyone also thinks that they deserve more money while everyone else should have to sacrifice, regardless of what sacrifices have already been present to get to the current situation. I am not quite sure what the american public thinks should be a highly-paid profession. To the best of my knowledge, the list is short. It includes 1) whatever job I have or am training to do; and 2) professional entertainers/athletes.

 

[listeriaismfb]

The general public are collectively *****ic - they equate a one year correspondence course with 10+ years of college + med school + residency. Both are extra education. Everyone also thinks that they deserve more money while everyone else should have to sacrifice, regardless of what sacrifices have already been present to get to the current situation. I am not quite sure what the american public thinks should be a highly-paid profession. To the best of my knowledge, the list is short. It includes 1) whatever job I have or am training to do; and 2) professional entertainers/athletes.

Very well put. Doctors are in the cross-hairs even though it's probably the fat cats in the insurance industry that are likely making the big bucks. Their lobby is stronger than ours.

 

[TMZ2007]

The general public are collectively *****ic - they equate a one year correspondence course with 10+ years of college + med school + residency.

Not to mention that many of us, myself included, are buried in educational debt and are expecting a good paycheck to pay it back with. Indeed, as much as I like medicine (and path!) and feel like I've found my calling, I seriously doubt that I would've taken on >$200k in loans and sacrificed 10 years of my youth for a <$100k/yr income.

 

[LADoc00]

Bundling. That would work out great for my group, given that we can't even get Part A from our hospital admins.

Good God...I will pray for you.

This is a nightmare.

Is that what being a Armenian in Turkey circa 1915 was like? I feel like a Polish Jew trying to sew my family heirlooms into my white coats and scrubs just to save something...

 

[yaah]

Not to mention that many of us, myself included, are buried in educational debt and are expecting a good paycheck to pay it back with. Indeed, as much as I like medicine (and path!) and feel like I've found my calling, I seriously doubt that I would've taken on >$200k in loans and sacrificed 10 years of my youth for a <$100k/yr income.

The public doesn't understand this. They think in terms of the immediate present and think anyone making >$100k is overpaid. I suspect that the end result of the "health care reform" is going to be loan forgiveness/reduction for people who go into primary care along with a reduction in payment for all physicians - but I am not sure where that leaves people who have already finished school. I am not quite so dire-minded as others about the future, possibly because I have already known that I am not going into a career that is the same as it was 20 years ago.

The airline industry is a good lesson - I have been reading the stories about the Buffalo commuter plane crash, and how it was basically caused by the pilot not knowing what to do, which was partly because the airline slashed pilot salaries and got an incompetent pilot. One of the "good" stories about airlines in the past year is the landing in the Hudson by an experience and competent pilot, who said that the way pilot salaries are plummeting, people like him are not going to choose that career anymore. There is probably a lesson there for people who would slash medicine in similar fashions - except it's different because it would take so long, if drastic changes were made and people flee the medical field, for the field to be repopulated with intelligent dedicated people. Med school 4 years, residency 3-5 years. The government would be strongly advised to consider this when they start slashing payments.