:24::24::24::24::24: Does anyone still watch FNC????? :willy_nilly: AllFearAllTheTime!!!:willy_nilly:Yeh, but nobody else did, so all is still right with the world.
:24::24::24::24::24: Does anyone still watch FNC????? :willy_nilly: AllFearAllTheTime!!!:willy_nilly:Yeh, but nobody else did, so all is still right with the world.
I thought my paragraph after that ststement explained what I meant. Besides, you did a pretty good job of responding for someone who doesn't understand.I don't understand when you say, 'opinion disguised as statistic'. The study I quoted is below, along with an abstract of the results of the study written by the researchers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/american_journal_of_medicine_09.pdf
I don't understand when you say, 'opinion disguised as statistic'. The study I quoted is below, along with an abstract of the results of the study written by the researchers.
Nova claims "reasoned arguments" but any statistic you put up he disagrees with, he's gonna verbally trash it. IT DOES boil down to whom "you" want to believe and he proves it daily.
http://www.census.gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235.pdf - It's on page 19.
I know I've stated this to you before ret, but depending on how things shake out, my wife and I are looking at her only working 3-4 days a week after residency and she's gonna be family practice. Depending on specifics it may not make any economic sense for her to work more than that....
Have fun finding a Dr. when Obamacare passses people...
Investors.com - 45% Of Doctors Would Consider Quitting If Congress Passes Health Care Overhaul
You've got to be shitting me with this article. Take a little of your own advice and go read the actual questions that were mailed out to these 1,376 respondents.
Then go look at the much larger poll done by Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York where the majority of doctors support a public option. Oh, and read those questions as well. You can definitely see a bias in the different questions and how they are presented.
And even if your article were true, that's good for the market, right? Because when a hole is made somewhere, it is always filled by something else. That's the motto of the free market, isn't it? It will open up opportunities for all those aspiring men and women that want to be doctors.
You've got to be shitting me with this article. Take a little of your own advice and go read the actual questions that were mailed out to these 1,376 respondents.
Then go look at the much larger poll done by Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York where the majority of doctors support a public option.
Respondents were asked to indicate which of three options they would most strongly support:
[FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond][FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond]1. Public and Private Options: [/FONT][/FONT]Provide people under age 65 the choice of enrolling in a new public health insurance plan (like Medicare) or in private plans.
[FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond][FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond]2. Private Options Only: [/FONT][/FONT]Provide people with tax credits or low income subsidies to buy private insurance coverage (without creating a public plan option).
[FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond][FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond]3. Public Option Only: [/FONT][/FONT]Eliminate private insurance and cover everyone in a single public plan like Medicare.
Support for Expanding Medicare Coverage
[FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond][FONT=AGaramond,AGaramond]Overall 58.3% of physicians support Medicare expansions to individuals 55 to 64 years of age (Figure 2). This support was consistent across all four specialty groups and ranged from (55.6% to 62.4%, p=0.08) across specialties
[/FONT][/FONT]
Oh, and read those questions as well. You can definitely see a bias in the different questions and how they are presented.
Do you support of oppose the current health care plan?
Will you quit or keep working if the health care plan passes?
Do you believe care can be provided to 47 million more people and have it cost less and provide a better quality of care?
And even if your article were true, that's good for the market, right? Because when a hole is made somewhere, it is always filled by something else.
That's the motto of the free market, isn't it? It will open up opportunities for all those aspiring men and women that want to be doctors.
I did, thanks much. I see no problem with the questions. They are not leading questions in the realm of "Do you support of oppose the communist health care plan that will kill babies and old people?"
On top of that, being married to a Doc, I've got a bit of anecdotal evidence to go along with said survey. I've personally heard, with my own two little ears, no less than a dozen older docs say they they only work to keep from being bored and that they will quit and go home before they put up with any more shit outta the gov't.
Now, since you're calling people out, will you show me the law requiring management of a business to gut the long term viability of a company for short term profits, Mr Big Expert Businessman?
http://www.offtopicz.net/50245-obama-speech-kiddies-9.html#post1255224
ROFL, "much larger" poll? You mean this one that sampled around 2000 docs instead of around 1400.
http://www.rwjf.org/files/research/48408physician.pdf
Look at what those docs are being asked at the top level...
then look further down in it...
So 63% want a mixed system letting people under 65 buy into a "public plan like Medicare" and 58% want to let people age 55-64 buy into Medicare.
Don't you think there might be a bit of overlap in there? Maybe, just maybe since the first question is inclusive of the second?
Not to mention the fact that the surveys give two totally different pieces of information.
The Sinai survey indicates that Drs. think we need reform, which we do in several areas, not the least of which is Medicaid, but it does not indicate exactly what the reform plan should be, only that they prefer a mixed "public private system" which could mean almost anything. It could mean the plan that I've posted multiple times.
The IBD survey indicates that Drs. do not like the reform packages as they are currently constituted.
Two different surveys, two relevent pieces of information applicable to different areas.
Oh yes most definitely biased. For sure :sarcasm
Please explain where you see bias in those questions?
Or would you prefer questions to the effect of "Do you support or strongly support the current health care plan?"
Except for a few bits and pieces you're missing in your economic brilliance, yes.
1. Training and licensing requirements mean that any "surge" in doctors is at least a decade out. The shortest education and training cycle is for family docs like my wife. It lasts 11 years minimum. Cycles for specialists can last nearly 20 years.
2. If the gov't is cramming down the amount Drs. make by cramming down payment for services, which is the only way to cut costs, if like the proponents claim you can get whatever care you want whenever you want it, then there's not a whole lof of incentive to spend a decade or two and north of $150,000 to go through med school now is there?
There's already a shortage of PCPs and family docs, WTF exactly do you think is gonna happen if you drive down the number of people becoming Drs as the population continues to grow.
I know I've stated this to you before ret, but depending on how things shake out, my wife and I are looking at her only working 3-4 days a week after residency and she's gonna be family practice. Depending on specifics it may not make any economic sense for her to work more than that....
For a NOOB posting with Tim, an administrator and longtime member, you sure have a shit attitude. Stick to your argument and lose the smart ass name calling.
Let me fill you in on something son. I have been involved with business since before you were a twinkle in you fathers eye. I have personally paid more dollars into the worker's comp fund than you have seen in your lifetime. I acquire more dollars in contracts yearly and manage those projects than you will make in your lifetime. So don't tell me about worker's comp and what it does. It's an insurance on top of another insurance. It ensures that liability of a company is covered in the event that a worker is injured on the job. It pays for all medical coverage and any future medical costs attributed to any workplace accident. It also covers any possible lawsuits and loss of future earnings. The latter two would still need coverage, but at a reduced rate of the current system since the vast majority of claims require only medical coverages. And why would you need to make sure medical coverages are available to employees if EVERYONE is already covered?
Exactly what's wrong with today's medicine. Instead of physicians entering the field for desire to help cure and mend, they are in it for $$$$$$$$$$. Fuck all new mercenary doctors.
Exactly what's wrong with today's medicine. Instead of physicians entering the field for desire to help cure and mend, they are in it for $$$$$$$$$$. Fuck all new mercenary doctors.
Ignore :eekDo you have any freaking clue how much medical school costs? As of 2008, the average debt carried by a medical school graduate upon starting their residency is $154,607. They're not in it for the money, but they deserve to be compensated fairly, and they have massive student loans by the time they're able to enter private practice, which for a primary care physician is about 11 years after starting college, as they have college, medical school, and residency. They have to have some way to be able to pay off those massive amount of student loans and still be able to provide for their families. My dad didn't have all of his loans paid off until he was in his early 40s, and he had medical school paid for him by the Air Force in exchange for 4 years of service.
Oh, but you won't be able to read any of this because you have me on ignore, but whatever... at least other people will be able to see how ludicrous your assertion that doctors are in it for the money is.
Under the bill, nearly everyone would be required to get insurance or pay a penalty
But insurers, in turn, would not be able to deny coverage to people with preexisting medical conditions or to cancel policies after people got sick, as happens in the current system.
To help pay for his bill, Baucus is proposing a series of new excise tax on insurance plans worth more than $8,000 for singles and $21,000 for families, and new fees on insurers, drug makers, device makers and clinical labs.
To help pay for his bill, Baucus is proposing a series of new excise tax on insurance plans worth more than $8,000 for singles and $21,000 for families, and new fees on consumers, consumers, consumers and consumers.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.