lostintime Posted May 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 You're subject to the will of the "free market" as well for anything else. Products that harm people or don't pass safety regulation aren't allowed in the other consumerism "free market" either. Free market is NOT equal to free-for-all. Some people might argue about whether those "safety regulations" are fair. That's the matter of life. What you're asking for is a more neutral party deciding what is safe healthcare or not. Kind of had to remove all physicians from that party considering they make up evidence-based guidelines and clinical care practices. Unless you only make it some party of people who no longer practice and have nothing to gain from it. Kind of idealistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 I agree, let's free market health care. It'll significantly drive down physician costs as they all clamor to compete with each other. They could try to oligopoly the market but we know physicians are greedy bastards who want the most for themselves so they'll continue to compete on price. Oh wait, what I describe is a true free market and that's not what it wanted by hose advocating for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 You're subject to the will of the "free market" as well for anything else. Products that harm people or don't pass safety regulation aren't allowed in the other consumerism "free market" either. I am allowed to take risks. I am allowed to buy a car that is cheaper even if it doesn't have all the safety features that a more expensive car does. I am allowed to go hang gliding. I am allowed to live in a neighborhood that has a higher crime rate than other neighborhoods. In your free market fantasy there is only one reason why I would be allowed to do all those things, but not be allowed to just as freely go to an IMG, ND, Chiroprator, or private citizen any of whom may be able to do whatever procedure I want done at a competency I find satisfactory for a price I find satisfactory. And that reason is you feel that others should be subject to the the free market but that you should be protected from the free market. You feel that MDs provide better service (for instance a lower complication rate), but you don't feel that such better service would truly be valued in a true free market, hence barriers to entry are enacted and maintained. Quality health care does not work in a free market. This was studied by Nobel Prize winner Arrow in the 1960s who found that unpredictability, barriers to entry, asymmetical information as well as other features make health care completely unsuitable for a free market. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted May 10, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 I think it's just on a spectrum of things. There's a lot of safe guards for the food that is being sold. You're NOT allowed to take those risks for a cheaper price. Supermarkets get closed down by Public Health if they don't meet standards, same with restaurants. Those places may very well be cheaper, but they get closed down. Sure you can go search for some in the back alley. I agree there is "more" of a free market for most consumerism than healthcare, but the examples you've been providing could very easily be countered. Cars can't be sold without a seat belt. Some people may want to take that risk for a more cheaper car. No can do. So maybe you should change your argument to the fact that the problem is who is setting the standards, NOT whether it's a free market or not. A lot of things are regulated and considered "free market". By your standards, NOTHING that is sold in Canada is part of a free market because everything goes under safety regulations or some sort of law/regulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 10, 2012 Report Share Posted May 10, 2012 By your standards, NOTHING that is sold in Canada is part of a free market because everything goes under safety regulations or some sort of law/regulation. Yes, that is exactly my argument. Free-market nuts complained when child labor laws were put in place, but the people understood that true free markets are not desirable (and rarely even possible). People who call for a free market are being disingenuous. We are going to have regulations no matter what. If this honestly was spoken then people could decide which regulations work best under which circumstances. Instead it is claimed that the choices are big government or the free market. Not true at all. Of course, in reality they are not actually calling for a free market, but understand that making such a claim is more beneficial for their interests then explaining the truth. They could say that what they are advocating is a health care system which still has regulations, but keeps regulations that benefit one group of people and gets rid of regulations that protect another group of people (usually the rich over the poor). So Barriers to entry regulations to protect MDs are required, but regulations to protect the consumer in their most desparate time of need? No, that's socialism. It is more appealing to say we should have a "free market." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaronjw Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 interesting article: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/canadian-doctors-warn-fee-cuts-pay-inequalities-will-spur-exodus/ some funny comments too lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 interesting article: http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/canadian-doctors-warn-fee-cuts-pay-inequalities-will-spur-exodus/ some funny comments too lol Excellent way to portray physicians as greedy, but maybe what's said in this article is not far from the truth. You see physicians threatening to see less patients and go to the US just because now, they will earn 250k rather than 300k (or something like this, I'm not claiming exact figures, but that's how it looks like). It also seems physicians are holding patients as hostages to keep their high salaries. Oh and this statement is pure BS: “For the past eight years, I’ve spent no less than 80, 90 hours a week in the hospital and it often gets far more excessive than that,” he said. “You don’t go into medicine because you want to be filthy rich. To put this much effort into something for 17 years, you could probably do better.” If it wasn't for the money, the pool would be the quarter of what it's now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-Stark Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 Oh and this statement is pure BS:“For the past eight years, I’ve spent no less than 80, 90 hours a week in the hospital and it often gets far more excessive than that,” he said. “You don’t go into medicine because you want to be filthy rich. To put this much effort into something for 17 years, you could probably do better.” If it wasn't for the money, the pool would be the quarter of what it's now. Well, the quoted individual just finished (I presume) a general surgery residency and fellowship, so I don't know why you suggest those hours are BS. They're almost certainly accurate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boodog Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 The problem that I have with the fee restructuring and cuts is that while it was unilateral without discussion and yes usually those decisions are not necessarily the best, the counter-arguments being used by physicians are laughable. "Patient care will be compromised," "Wait times will be longer," "Access will come up short for patients with chronic disease," "Services will be not as accessible" This is some of the quotes from the OMA. Seriously??? Are we really saying because we'll get payed 10-15% less per visit that we aren't going to do the same job we were doing? We're going to quit over a small drop in our salary? How will wait times be longer? And in what way will services not be as accessible with a reduction in fees? Now I'm not coming and saying I'm in favour of pay cuts, why would I be, when in a few years I'll be out of residency and in the work force. But what I do think is that physicians need to come up with better arguments against these cuts if they want to prevent them rather than the current ones which I feel harm the profession and portray us as greedy bastards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mourning Cloak Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 The problem that I have with the fee restructuring and cuts is that while it was unilateral without discussion and yes usually those decisions are not necessarily the best, the counter-arguments being used by physicians are laughable. "Patient care will be compromised," "Wait times will be longer," "Access will come up short for patients with chronic disease," "Services will be not as accessible" This is some of the quotes from the OMA. Seriously??? Are we really saying because we'll get payed 10-15% less per visit that we aren't going to do the same job we were doing? We're going to quit over a small drop in our salary? How will wait times be longer? And in what way will services not be as accessible with a reduction in fees? Now I'm not coming and saying I'm in favour of pay cuts, why would I be, when in a few years I'll be out of residency and in the work force. But what I do think is that physicians need to come up with better arguments against these cuts if they want to prevent them rather than the current ones which I feel harm the profession and portray us as greedy bastards. While most established physicians might not be willing to uproot and move over high-handed treatment and a pay cut (but a few will), it will certainly hurt recruitment. It may take a few years, but if Ontario can't recruit and there's an active disincentive to stick around (e.g. the animosity between the physicians and the government), the province will begin to feel the effect of a brain drain . . . exactly as described above. Now, it may be that in the coming years the anticipated doctor glut actually comes to pass, and is in fact enough of a glut to force doctors into even the most undesirable jobs. However, does Ontario really want to be the place that attracts the bottom-of-the-barrel people who couldn't get a better job somewhere else? Or, does the province even care? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 Well, the quoted individual just finished (I presume) a general surgery residency and fellowship, so I don't know why you suggest those hours are BS. They're almost certainly accurate. I'm not talking about residency hours, I'm talking about the motives behind pursuing medicine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLengr Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 I'm not talking about residency hours, I'm talking about the motives behind pursuing medicine. I'm impressed you can accurately tell the motivation behind someone you have never met. What will hurt the province more than the fee schedule changes will be the hostility the government has shown to physicians. That will be a bigger barrier to future recruitment than fee changes ever would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostintime Posted May 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 I'm impressed you can accurately tell the motivation behind someone you have never met. What will hurt the province more than the fee schedule changes will be the hostility the government has shown to physicians. That will be a bigger barrier to future recruitment than fee changes ever would be. I agree, I was more turned off by that than any of the actual fee changes. I think it's done on purpose though, to show other professions/organizations they're planning to use as the next scapegoat that "they mean business". They are politicians, they could have easily done this in a way to make physicians seem even more greedy (i.e. be very sympathetic, avoid insulting them wanting "money bags", giving false stats, for one find someone who has a more pleasant image to portray in public) by playing the "Nice Cop". But they're trying to send a specific message with the "Bad Cop" approach. And people already detest physicians for making "too much" so even this works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Hood Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 I'm impressed you can accurately tell the motivation behind someone you have never met. What will hurt the province more than the fee schedule changes will be the hostility the government has shown to physicians. That will be a bigger barrier to future recruitment than fee changes ever would be. Well, the guy said that people don't go into medicine to become rich, and that's what I was calling BS, he wasn't talking about his personal motives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
national Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/canadian-doctors-warn-fee-cuts-pay-inequalities-will-spur-exodus/ Nothing new, but scroll down to the comments and check out the comments from "soaponarope" Dear all first year med students. Please don't be this guy. (edit: didn't realize this link was on the previous page. still, hate that kid. for reference, i'm a pgy-2) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wayward son Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/canadian-doctors-warn-fee-cuts-pay-inequalities-will-spur-exodus/ Nothing new, but scroll down to the comments and check out the comments from "soaponarope" Dear all first year med students. Please don't be this guy. (edit: didn't realize this link was on the previous page. still, hate that kid. for reference, i'm a pgy-2) LOL...I responded to the piece of work a couple hours ago. Unfortunately the National Post won't allow me to respond to his response to me. That is probably just as well, as I have better things to do with my time. But his inability to relate to other people and his disdain of whole groups of people who are not as perfect as he believes himself to be make me feel for his future patients. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmorelan Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 LOL...I responded to the piece of work a couple hours ago. Unfortunately the National Post won't allow me to respond to his response to me. That is probably just as well, as I have better things to do with my time. But his inability to relate to other people and his disdain of whole groups of people who are not as perfect as he believes himself to be make me feel for his future patients. Yeah the poster isn't exactly putting forward a logical case. Oh well, at the very least I hope we come out of this looking clean. In the long run that is our best protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLengr Posted May 13, 2012 Report Share Posted May 13, 2012 Well, the guy said that people don't go into medicine to become rich, and that's what I was calling BS, he wasn't talking about his personal motives. I shoulda read closer. I disagree however that the majority of people entering medicine are motivated by financial gain primarily. In my experience, for most, it's a secondary or tertiary motivation. A really nice bonus. Maybe your experience is different, in which case I pity the med class you are in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mm88 Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/05/12/canadian-doctors-warn-fee-cuts-pay-inequalities-will-spur-exodus/ Nothing new, but scroll down to the comments and check out the comments from "soaponarope" Dear all first year med students. Please don't be this guy. (edit: didn't realize this link was on the previous page. still, hate that kid. for reference, i'm a pgy-2) This guy is a real piece of work, I wonder if they are someone from this board! Presuming that everyone is as fortunate as him to live with mom and dad for med school. Sheesh. What about the people in med school who have kids of their own already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 This guy is a real piece of work, I wonder if they are someone from this board! Presuming that everyone is as fortunate as him to live with mom and dad for med school. Sheesh. What about the people in med school who have kids of their own already? Clearly, that soaponarope guy (the 'voice' of his posts reminds me of one I have seen on here, but I can't place it) has no idea that people actually experience things differently from him, or have different life paths. He seems to assume all doctors travel a direct path from high school to UG to med school. I'm pretty sure my parents would be considerably less than thrilled to have me, my husband, and our kids move into their house when we are fully self-sufficient, just so I can avoid using a medical student LOC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A-Stark Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 Agreed. I certainly wasn't forced to do any grad work before entering med school - I just didn't decide to apply until I was halfway through my masters! Living at home was an option for some of the time before med school, but once I started it would have involved driving over an hour each way everyday in my non-existent car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 Isn't a car almost essential for med school anyway? At least during clerkship? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLengr Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 Isn't a car almost essential for med school anyway? At least during clerkship? School dependent. Certainly at my school it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Der Kaiser Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 Clearly, that soaponarope guy (the 'voice' of his posts reminds me of one I have seen on here, but I can't place it) has no idea that people actually experience things differently from him, or have different life paths. He seems to assume all doctors travel a direct path from high school to UG to med school. I'm pretty sure my parents would be considerably less than thrilled to have me, my husband, and our kids move into their house when we are fully self-sufficient, just so I can avoid using a medical student LOC. Wait a second, you didn't plan your whole life around getting into medical school and paying for it? I feel really bad for you not being as awesome as soaponarope. Also, that name seems familiar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdy Posted May 14, 2012 Report Share Posted May 14, 2012 School dependent. Certainly at my school it was. MUN, guessing by your screen name? Considering the focus on rural physician training there, that comes as no surprise. Wait a second, you didn't plan your whole life around getting into medical school and paying for it? I feel really bad for you not being as awesome as soaponarope. Also, that name seems familiar. The funny thing is I actually did. Got into physics at U of O right out of high school and was planning to apply to their med school. My life took several turns between then and now, so my plans took a hiatus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.