|
Musicmystery -> RE: Basic Functioning of Government (3/29/2010 6:39:53 PM)
|
If your attitude ever stopped climbing up your ass, we could have a conversation, instead of your stock performance.
The kid indeed tied the claim to three doctors in a discussion linking this to the health care bill. If that's good enough for you, that explains quite a lot about your positions.
You changed the topic to the shortage of primary care physicians, noting correctly this is an ongoing problem, existing long before the health care bill. I agreed with you---yet here you are dancing around talking about ignoring evidence.
It's a separate issue. If we repeal the bill this evening, the problem will still be exacerbated, because economic incentive heavily influences doctors to follow specialties--even doctors who might prefer primary care, as medical school is a costly proposition. There is, and will be, a worsening shortage of primary care physicians. Period.
The question now, if you'd like to have a conversation, is how to do that. Probably this means intervention with who gets paid what, and understandably, specialists are not going to like it, since we can't afford to simply throw lots of cash at primary care physicians so that their income equals that of specialists. And conservatives aren't going to like the intervention. But the market isn't going to correct that on its own--or if it is, I'd be sincerely interested in the argument explaining how.
But the shortage is not due to the increase in insured, as was implied. I'm not even convinced it's all that much--less than a 10% increase, or a 44 hour week vs. a 40 hour week (hypothetically--doctors of course work much longer and in some cases much less). Or, instead of seeing my doctor once a year for a checkup, I see him once every 13 months. I'm fine with that.
Perhaps it would make sense to pay school costs for doctors agreeing to go into primary care. That's going to cost us too. I doubt conservatives would go along with it.
|
|
|
|
