01-25-2007, 02:03 AM | #31 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Clinton Township, MI
Posts: 3,126
|
insurance companies make a more than 10%
__________________
Its all about the suit |
01-25-2007, 02:15 AM | #32 | |
Resident Jackass
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Posts: 1,846
|
Quote:
|
|
01-25-2007, 02:26 AM | #33 | |
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
|
Quote:
Actually, the government already does pay for the medical schooling of people who also do a PhD degree (like me), in order to encourage MDs to enter research and academia. You don't have to have a PhD to do academic medicine, but it can be helpful especially for basic science work. The point is--academic MDs make less money than private practice docs, and so the government funds these MD/PhD programs. In addition, the government will pay 35,000 dollars a year of med school debt for two years of post-graduate research to lessen the debt burden on academic docs. Here is a question: how much has the free market driven up physician salaries? I mean--if you want to go to an accupuncturist to treat your cancer or heart disease, you could do this, and it'd probably save you money. Would it help with the disease? Not likely, unless you have an interesting placebo effect. If you want to actually solve the problem, you need to go to someone who has significant expertise. Should there be more of these people in the country in order to drive up supply and thereby also drive down salaries? I think the answer to this question is related to access to physicians. Is there a problem getting access to a doctor? It's supply and demand, right? How difficult is it to get an appointment with a doctor if you're very sick? Compared to other countries, it's pretty darn easy to get an appointment in the states. In Canada, you might have to wait 6 months, and the doctor makes much less money. I think that reasonable access suggests that the supply of doctors is adequate, for most specialties (not for dermatology, though). My point is: I don't think this is a supply and demand issue. I think it's a question of how valuable is the service that is being provided. Last edited by SoonerCoug; 01-25-2007 at 02:50 AM. |
|
01-25-2007, 02:33 AM | #34 |
Demiurge
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 36,365
|
govts already subsidize medical education to the tune of millions of dollars per school.
I paid around 8k per year for my med school. Trust me, the actual cost was much higher than 8k per year. |
01-25-2007, 03:01 AM | #35 | |
Resident Jackass
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Roswell, New Mexico
Posts: 1,846
|
Quote:
The German model , in which you have compulsory insurance is worth a look to fix our medical system. I think that we definitely ought look at other health care systems to see what they do that works, in order to drive our health care spending down, and also, to make the system more efficient in providing more preventive access, etc. i am not with Mormon Red Death in thinking that governmental involvement in an area ALWAYS equals a problem, but I do think that the less intervention is better in almost every area. But Health Care might very well be one of the few areas in which governmental is not only necessary, but smart. The truth is that continuing on the same path is unlikely to produce better results, and health is not an area to be trifled with. |
|
01-25-2007, 03:23 AM | #36 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
|
01-25-2007, 03:41 AM | #37 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
|
Quote:
I'm interested in lowering health care costs. Health care costs have grown at triple inflation for the last 10-15 years. That's a big problem. |
|
01-25-2007, 03:53 AM | #38 | |
Formerly known as MudPhudCoug
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Land of desolation
Posts: 2,548
|
Quote:
Physician salaries have VERY little if anything to do with recent increases in health care costs. I think the main reasons for increased health care costs result from: 1) New, expensive medications--including biologics (physicians don't get any money for prescribing more expensive medications) 2) Doctors playing defensive medicine (or sometimes lazy medicine)... i.e. doing an MRI either because a patient knows about the high tech stuff and demands it, or because a doctor is afraid of getting sued if he or she doesn't order the MRI, or maybe even the doctor being lazy and sending the patient for an unnecessary procedure. I'd argue that for anything unnecessary, the government could regulate this just as well as an HMO. But this defensive medicine thing doesn't increase physician salaries. I also think HMOs often cut costs by decreasing quality of care or denying a claim unfairly to very ill patients--and that's a very bad thing to do. 3) New, expensive high tech diagnostics (a doctor would only rarely get a cut from these kinds of diagnostics--if theyr'e a part owner of something) I don't think physician salaries have increased more than inflation....and Medicare and Medicaid compensation have not even kept up with inflation. Last edited by SoonerCoug; 01-25-2007 at 03:55 AM. |
|
01-25-2007, 04:00 AM | #39 |
Senior Member
|
I work specifically in the medical recruiting industry. Know the industry very well.
It is wrong to say that Physician salaries are the problem for insurance rates. In fact it's so off it's not even funny.
__________________
Masquerading as Cougarguards very own genius dumbass since 05'. |
Bookmarks |
|
|