A reason why their compensation differs.
Related posts:
- Dissent in the physicians’ lobby?
- Think you’re waiting long for a doctor now
- Expert witnesses: They’ll "say whatever they’re paid to say"
- A doctor is sued for ignoring a DNR order
- Female physicians and the Canadian doctor shortage
- Pot smoker breaks pain contract, sues doctor
- Waiting hours to see a doctor, and patients billing physicians for lost time
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 18 comments }
You make yourself look bitter and ignorant when you say comments like this crim… yes the reason doctors are paid more is because they restrict their numbers (sarcasm). This is the same reason a lawyer makes more than high school graduate too. Or maybe it is that people value their health in their one time body more than they value their X number of cars in a lifetime that are easily replaceable.
Now if want to compare something that would be a little bit closer you could compare how much the 1,000,000 dollar race car mechanics make compared to a doctor. Yet, I still think people consider a life to be worth more than 1,000,000 dollars as shown by wrongful death lawsuits…
What about stock traders who make millions just by playing with other people’s money? What about professional sports players who make millions for playing a game?
which principle applies to them?
I continue to opt for the economics argument as did the AMA back in 1910 when they implemented the findings of the Flexner Report. I would have no issue with physicians making a killing (so to speak) if the system was not an overt supply side restricted system. We now have a system where the most bottom of the barrel physician (think corner stop sleazy mechanic) can make a killing in the field. The race car mechanic analogy does not hold because the under the current system every physician is treated as being a race car mechanic.
Yes, it does. Do you not consider every human being worth as much as a race car? Every doctor is working on a race car because every human coniders their life to be worth AT LEAST that much. You talk about supply side restrictions, well I say let’s get rid of these and flood the market with doctors. Yet, if someone needs their life saved and I am the only doctor around at this time I want to be able to charge 3,000,000 dollars or 50 percent of their wage for the rest of their life. I want to charge what my service is actually worth to a person if there are going to be a lot of doctors. An you know what … since you can’t spend money when your dead I bet I could profit a lot more from a system like this. You see crim. it all balances out. If you have a pulmonary embolism I can give you the drug to save your life, but the sicker you are the more I am going to charge because that would be FAIR economics just like lifting the restrictions on supply.
“We now have a system where the most bottom of the barrel physician (think corner stop sleazy mechanic) can make a killing in the field. The race car mechanic analogy does not hold because the under the current system every physician is treated as being a race car mechanic.”
You have it backwards. My fees are determined by the insurers, especially medicare. Every provider is treated the same. If I am exceptional, I receive exactly the same payment as if I am sub-par. And the payment is more of the corner mechanic variety. I get paid about 1500 to remove a brain tumor from a medicare patient. The surgery might take an entire day, and I also provide three months of postop care for that. How far will 1500 get you in car repair?
You just proved his point – “You can give the drug that saves his life.” The government has given you a monopoly on that dispensation of the drug. But you can charge that 30,000 if you so choose. But you chose not to by signing up with Medicaid. Again, that’s a CHOICE you made.
You talk about “fair” economics, but the reality is the majority of doctors probably aren’t interested in fair economics. Because that would involve competition, rating of their care, etc. And most importantly, it wouldn’t involve guaranteed payments from the govt. and well funded health insurers to the extent they receive now.
Sure, you bitch about the amount you’re paid, but it’s still a hell of a lot more than 95% of this country. And I’d bet many of you bitching would be extremely hesitant to dip your toes in the true free market waters.
“If I am exceptional, I receive exactly the same payment as if I am sub-par.”
And vice versa. In fact, if you are grossly negligent, you still receive that pay.
“How far will 1500 get you in car repair?”
How many mechanics are assured they’ll get paid? Again, you CHOSE the guaranteed payments over the risk of the free market. The mechanic doesn’t have that choice.
“How many mechanics are assured they’ll get paid?”
Uh, all of them. I’ve never been to one who didn’t insist on payment up front. You don’t get your car back until the bill is paid.
Insurance doesn’t work like that. I get paid months later, after I beg for it for a while. Occassionally we get stiffed. You can’t take back the surgery at that point.
If I am grossly negligent, I can lose everything I have.
If I try to compare my insurance contracts to my colleagues, that is considered collusion, and it is illegal.
A litle thought before you post, please…
“Uh, all of them. I’ve never been to one who didn’t insist on payment up front. You don’t get your car back until the bill is paid.”
Actually, you can drive that car off the lot and there isn’t anything they can do about it but sue you for the bill.
“Insurance doesn’t work like that. I get paid months later, after I beg for it for a while. Occassionally we get stiffed.”
You get “stiffed” because you and the insurer have a dispute over the bill. Not because it can’t pay, you can’t find it, it gave you false info about who it was. You have no idea what it’s like to rely on individuals to pay your bills.
“If I am grossly negligent, I can lose everything I have.”
So can a mechanic. Do a faulty brake job and let those bad brakes result in an accident, you think you won’t be sued?
“If I try to compare my insurance contracts to my colleagues, that is considered collusion, and it is illegal. “
No it’s not. Why do you think that? People compare contracts all the time.
“A litle thought before you post, please… “
Indeed.
Some of you make me sick. you want it both ways. When it comes to people who can’t afford healthcare you tell us all how if they can afford a new oil filter for the car they can certainly afford healthcare. You are making yourself look stupid!
But then when you get compared to a machanic you want us all to know how there really is no comparison whatsoever.
There really isn’t! If you don’t value life anymore than you do a piece of equipement then you are in the wrong business. But thanks for spelling it out for us. There use to be a time when I never would have dreamed a Physician who has 12 plus years of education could possibly be compared to the local mechanic who fixes my car. Seems strange you are the one’s who do all the comparing.
According to some of you highly trained people you even compare what you do (save lives) presumably, to being nothing more valuable than being able to get a drink of water…How sad!
The post above this post makes no sense… it looks like it was written by a product of the public schools.
Yes, it does. Do you not consider every human being worth as much as a race car? Every doctor is working on a race car because every human coniders their life to be worth AT LEAST that much.
Self-aggrandizement will get you nowhere. The answer to your first question is no. Physicians perform a job function. If every physician turns every problem associated with a patient into the equivalent of every mechanic turning a problem with a Hyundai into that associated with a McLaren F1 then the problem lies [fill in the black]. Just like there are no miracles and no bad outcomes – both are simply the faces placed on an incomplete understanding of the physical system under study…every person and their maladies are not race cars. If you do not know enough to differentiate the Hyundai than the race car and if your methods are not precise enough to aid in this distinction than the problem lies with you and not with the underlying system under study. Centuries of scientific advancement with understanding the underlying systems that govern the biophysical human condition and some would have us believe that the human body is as mysterious as the source of thunder and lightening was to the ancient Greeks.
You talk about supply side restrictions, well I say let’s get rid of these and flood the market with doctors. Yet, if someone needs their life saved and I am the only doctor around at this time I want to be able to charge 3,000,000 dollars or 50 percent of their wage for the rest of their life.
Just like every mechanic would like to charge for fixing your Mercedes if you are in the desert around with no other mechanic for hundreds of miles. The problem is, the health care market is more akin to the desert than an oasis when it comes to competition engendered by a sufficient supply of providers (the key word here is sufficient).
I want to charge what my service is actually worth to a person if there are going to be a lot of doctors. An you know what … since you can’t spend money when your dead I bet I could profit a lot more from a system like this. You see crim. it all balances out.
I would have no problems with you charging what you wished under the following caveats – removal of supply side restrictions and removal of oligopolistic market cornering restrictions. You see, when you use the power of big government to corner a particular market (e.g. health care) than you should at least not cry when the same power of big government is used to pimp you to another special interest group. Under a free market system you could charge what you wished but you might be out of business if you charged beyond what the other dozens or hundreds of providers in your local area were charging.
If you have a pulmonary embolism I can give you the drug to save your life, but the sicker you are the more I am going to charge because that would be FAIR economics just like lifting the restrictions on supply.
Yes. If my C5 has a faulty wiring harness that could deploy the supplemental restraint system in an untimely manner, thereby being life threating, I could take it to a mechanic to have it fixed. The thing is, because of much less onerous government intervention, I could take it to one of hundreds of places to have the work done. The health care providers are now feeling and have felt for some time, the bite of the same government power that they used to corner the health care delivery market (and no chiropractic is not health care it is a fraud – let us put that red herring to rest before it even shows up).
“Actually, you can drive that car off the lot and there isn’t anything they can do about it but sue you for the bill.”
What planet you live on CJD. My cart sits behind a razor topped fence until after I pay.
Of course I think your typical “legal” statement hit the nail right on the head of the difference between the collaborative nature of medicine versus the adversial nature of law.
Yes, medicine is all one big happy family, all working together for the greater good in a field of butterflies surrounded by a forest of happy nymphs.
I’ll repeat – you can drive that car off the lot. The fact you’re scared to doesn’t change the fact you are permitted to.
Tell you what tough guy, You climb over a fence topped with razor wire THEN you can tell me how scared I am.
“Yes, medicine is all one big happy family, all working together for the greater good in a field of butterflies surrounded by a forest of happy nymphs.”
Big happy family no. But when the $hit hits the fan we work together for the best of the patient. If you had ever been to a real code (not the TV BS) you would have some clue as to what I am talking about. The few times I have delt with “legal” processes while trying to do what’s best for the patient, I have been utterly disgusted with how slow, adversial, self-centered, and frankly downright SCARED of making a decision you guys have to accept responsibility for down the road.
Thanks for not realizing your own point. In order to understand how doctors work and what they do, someone must have some training in how it works, according to you.
But with all the legal knowledge you’ve gained from your “few times” dealing with the legal system, you’ve got it all figured out!!
Your powers of perception are unparalleled.
Read for comprehension, I am not talking about my experience with the legal system in malpractice, I am talking about my experience with the legal system when it involves my patient’s best interests being violated by a legal system (ie legal fiduciaries etc)who are more interested in watching their own backsides than doing what is ethical and right in a timely fashion.
Since that’s the first time you explained what your experience was, how were we able to figure it out without Fristian diagnostic powers?
Since in those cases, as a witness, you were almost certainly barred from hearing any testimony but your own, or seeing any of the evidence entered, nor do you know what the particular statutes say, would it be fair to call your opinion. . . uninformed?
Sometimes the law dictates a result you don’t agree with. That’s not a problem with the system that applies the law, it’s a problem with your legislature. If you are too lazy to lobby to change it, then the problem is your own.
Comments on this entry are closed.