Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
More specifically, should the government subsidize primary care physician's education?
Should subsidies be given to encourage more people to go into primary care?
Quote:
Between 1997 and 2005, the number of doctors who became primary-care physicians decreased by about 50 percent, which means there are only 1,000 to 2,000 new primary-care doctors each year. Only 31 percent of all American doctors are in primary care, compared to about 50 percent in Canada, Germany, and France, and it's a major reason why our medical care is not as good as theirs. A recent study show that the states in America with the highest ratio of primary care doctors have better health outcomes than the states with more specialists, even after adjusting for other factors such as age and income.
Why Our Health Matters: A Vision of Medicine That Can Transform Our Future by Andrew Weil, M.D.
Do you feel America needs more primary care physicians?
Last edited by PurpleLove08; 10-15-2009 at 02:16 PM..
Reason: made a mistake in wording =]
There is no reason for the TAXPAYERS should subsidize a doctors education.
Sort of a ridiculous argument since the Federal government has and does subsidize education for more than a century, starting with the establishment of land grant colleges and universities, veterans educational benefits, the National Defense Education Act of 1958, even Ronald Reagan provided block grants for the recruitment and training of teachers.
And, if I'm correct, the original poster wants the government to fully PAY for a Doctors education - provide it at no cost.
the libs always think it will be "at no cost". It's free money, from the Federal Money Tree.
Actually, I learned from reading the Baucus bill that we have been subsidizing intern education, and there are provisions for making us continue to do so. Personally, I don't see the need, since the medical profession ends up making quite a comfortable living, to put it mildly. I also don't see it as a function of Government.
Why stop at medical education? Why not everybody, as has been suggested. We're going to go broke (actually, we already are), so what difference does it make how many trillions of debt we have, or how it breaks down by individual. We can't pay it anyway.
More specifically, should the government subsidize primary care physician's education?
Should subsidies be given to encourage more people to go into primary care?
Why Our Health Matters: A Vision of Medicine That Can Transform Our Future by Andrew Weil, M.D.
Do you feel America needs more primary care physicians?
The democrats in Washington should go after the greedy liberals who run our higher education institutions, who keep raising tuition rates that far out pace inflation.
The greedy SOBs in our colleges and universities keep running up the costs of education, and all the government does is reward them with free taxpayer money. They continue to raise tuition rates, and our answer is to give them more taxpayer money?????????????
Why is the first and last answer for libs always to raise taxes, and give the money away??????
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
the libs always think it will be "at no cost". It's free money, from the Federal Money Tree. 
