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.
LOL. That's because medical school is an example of (mostly unnecessary) elitism, for the most part working on the body is not that different than working on a car. Check the military (or most other countries in the world) for how much basic medical care is provided by people who have also carried a gun for 6 weeks, not spent that time learning latin. That's not to say that *all* medical care could be provided by trade schools, but a large subset could be.
Do you know what a nurse is? What about a dental hygienist?
There are most definitely different accents in the US - the only issue is that it's almost wholly unstated (with a few notable exceptions) about which ones are higher class and which are lower class, and I find it interesting how they are adjusting as places generally become higher class (or lower class, though I can't really think of an example).
Some prominent examples are Boston Brahman - top upper class but dying out, generic-midwest being the #1 upper class accent, New York being the financial and cultural center of the US but the NY accent not being copied for social climbers, and the Texas accent moving from very distinct to be more aligned with generic mid-west.
I think the reason we keep such things more quiet in the US is that true mobility is almost wholly based on income, which is most assuredly not true in other places in the world. When those 'class issues' do arise and are discussed in the US it's pretty rare.
LOL. That's because medical school is an example of (mostly unnecessary) elitism, for the most part working on the body is not that different than working on a car. Check the military (or most other countries in the world) for how much basic medical care is provided by people who have also carried a gun for 6 weeks, not spent that time learning latin. That's not to say that *all* medical care could be provided by trade schools, but a large subset could be.
I'm sure that the "idle rich" think of doctors as just slightly better trained mechanics for the body! After all, they are working with their hands, even if they DO happen to be self-employed! That is far, far different than purely directing others to run the businesses that you own or to tend to your various holdings while you basically just socialize with others exactly like you.
It all comes down to working (even managing, as in execs who are just high level employees) versus "managing" those people who REALLY manage your stuff for you. It's the degree of removedness from that filthy lucre and the action required to make it. Even Trump is a step down from that highest level because he is "hands on" with his business.
Class, as a topic of conversation is sure to cause a ton of discomfort for those who would rather think of America as a "classless society" as they were taught in public school. The main differences in American social classes would include your address, what schools you attended, family background and social affiliations. And yes the upper class doesn't think of themselves as such but instead like to portray their lives as the reward for their individual success. Conversely, the low proles are also thought to be occupying the low rungs of society as their reward for a perceived laziness and poor parenting. The class issues have been debated to death here, so..
Mr. Reeves is absolutely right. The hypocrisy of American class-consciousness (or its absence) is risibly caustic. In the American narrative, every successful person was born in a log-cabin, that he/she built with his/her own hands. And everyone who fails, is a junkie, an idiot, a person of loose morals and execrable character, or all three. This being purportedly the land of freedom and equal-opportunity, nobody’s lot in life is fixed, and the onus falls on everyone to elevate themselves, according to their abilities, work-ethic and stridency.
My point is not to argue for punitively progressive tax-structure or other forms of redistribution of wealth, but rather, to exhort Americans to acknowledge the role of chance and luck. Not everyone who drives drunk, flaunts the speed limit in a jalopy with bad brakes, and fails to wear his seat-belt, will be involved in an accident. And many people who scrupulously obey the laws, signal whenever turning, and yield at every yield sign, will nevertheless careen off of the road and kill themselves. There are chain-smokers who live to 90, dying comfortably in their bed, and world-class athletes who collapse from a heart-attack on the running-track at 40. Many who study hard, will nevertheless barely attain a C-average in school; and many who party and never even take their books home, will still make the Dean’s List.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_
It's entirely possible for one not to be a liberal per se and agree with this anti-merit push from the left. I don't pretend to understand how but I'll acknowledge your stance.
Well, two hallmarks of the modern “Left” is affinity for regulations, in the belief that thorough regulations will preclude abuse, accident or ill consequences; and veneration of systematization and planning, as if having a good plan guarantees good success, while lack of plan is “planning to fail”. My argument above is the negation of these two points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDS_
...I don't know what you do for a living but I'm betting someone who went to trade school for a few weeks wouldn't be as good at it. By your silly logic we should fire most teachers, dentists, professors, cops, lawyers, accountants etc. as less qualified people could do some of the job.
In many countries, including fairly advanced ones, medical school is not a post-graduate academic program after a 4-year college degree, but what amounts to an undergraduate degree itself. More precisely, engineers and physicists and the like go through a 6-year degree program, culminating with a thesis. This is roughly equivalent to a Master’s degree in the US. In much of Eastern Europe, for example, this would be an “engineering diploma”. Medical doctors go through a similar program. It’s 6 years, not 6 weeks; and entry to the program requires passing rigorous exams, as does successful graduation. But the point is that physicians are not placed on a pedestal above say physicists. On the contrary, professional practice in the sciences generally requires a PhD (doctorate degree), whereas professional practice as a medical doctor does not require an, ahem, doctorate.
The point is that in America, we've somehow elevated medicine to especially high-class status. Maybe that has some contribution to why health-care is expensive in America?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLDSoon
...Success is not guaranteed by hard work. Many attain success without working all that hard. A lot more comes into play and the more people understand that, the more they can make realistic goals.
... Problem is most 'Losers' feel its unfair when they lose because they 'played so hard' and the winners are convinced that they should win all the time because they won last time. And woe unto anyone that says different.
Indeed. “Neither the race goes to the swift, nor the battle to the warriors, but time and chance overtake them all”. Americans should work harder at studying their Bibles….
I know we have tussled on this in the past, but I would argue that while getting through medical school may be (mostly) based on merit, getting into medical school has a lot to do with with class and where one comes from. Some groups are at a distinct advantage in that area - namely, those with good prior education (which is tied to income whether we are talking private or public), those with educated parents, those with the resources to afford both college and medical school, and those with the work ethic to get there.
With the price of education rising exponentially over the past few decades, the cost of attending both college and med school without loans is really quite out of reach for most outside of the upper middle and upper class. Med school alone typically run you $35K to $60K per year these days. Even UTSW, which is typically considered a bargain, runs nearly $20K a year. Add on cost of living expenses and it adds up quickly.
Can the hard working kid from an impoverished background get into and through medical school? Sure - this is America. But it's going to take some lucky breaks along the way and potentially, a crap-ton of debt. People aren't denied entrance into med school here because of their class. But as far as their ability to get there is concerned, as well as how much of a hole they are in when finished, well...let's just say class is a factor.
Sure class is a factor. My point is kids from all sorts of backgrounds, creeds, colors, each sex, socioeconomic circumstances etc. actually do go to professional schools.
I'm very concerned this effort to bifurcate society into a privileged camp and an under-served camp will simply place one more barrier in the way of educating our most vulnerable kids well.
My son just graduated from UTSW all in it cost him about $40K per year, school + living expenses and yes all the Texas schools are exceptional bargains. Med. schools help poor kids find grants, scholarships and the best loans. If a poor kid qualifies for medical school s/he will be able to afford it - albeit with loans.
Thats true but then we'd be getting into the question of what constitutes a 'good' education and who gets it and why?
On one end, there's the idiot that wins the lottery...my thinking was more to the C average kid that inherits a million dollar business from a parent contrasted with the hardworking classmate with all A's from a middle class family that becomes a doctor but is never as rich as the C student with the family money. Both well educated, only one worked hard.
Now put both their kids in the same classroom. Will one's overall success eventually catch up to the other? Maybe. How many generations will it take? How much work? Should 'catching up' even be a goal?
My son is a new MD., man that sounds so odd to me, anyway you are correct the path to becoming a doc in the US is almost unbelievably tough and long. Point being most everyone who becomes a doc. knows they are leaving a number of no and low pay years on the table during schooling and residency. Plus they could make as much or more doing other things later that are far less academically/physically/mentally demanding. As one of my friends who is a doc. told my son when he was accepted to medical school, "if you are smart enough to get into medical school you are smart enough not to go".
In many countries, including fairly advanced ones, medical school is not a post-graduate academic program after a 4-year college degree, but what amounts to an undergraduate degree itself. More precisely, engineers and physicists and the like go through a 6-year degree program, culminating with a thesis. This is roughly equivalent to a Master’s degree in the US. In much of Eastern Europe, for example, this would be an “engineering diploma”. Medical doctors go through a similar program. It’s 6 years, not 6 weeks; and entry to the program requires passing rigorous exams, as does successful graduation. But the point is that physicians are not placed on a pedestal above say physicists. On the contrary, professional practice in the sciences generally requires a PhD (doctorate degree), whereas professional practice as a medical doctor does not require an, ahem, doctorate.
The point is that in America, we've somehow elevated medicine to especially high-class status. Maybe that has some contribution to why health-care is expensive in America?
There is no question the MD and DO paths in the US and Canada are longer than other places. As an observer of the field it seems that more and more students are able to complete college requirements and med school in less than 8 years but all US states, with almost no exceptions, require full blown residencies before licensure as a physician.
The OECD says that as a percentage of healthcare spending US doctors are paid not quite the lowest share in the western world. Physician compensation is much higher in Germany and France for example as a share of healthcare costs. Now that's a bit distorted as we spend a very high percentage of GDP on healthcare. A very large related pain point being that we spend a staggering sum on people who are dying.
I'm very concerned this effort to bifurcate society into a privileged camp and an under-served camp will simply place one more barrier in the way of educating our most vulnerable kids well.
EDS - I'm interested in how you see this occurring.
My sense was that the article was not saying we should try and divide people into camps, but rather highlighting the strange practice here in the states of ignoring or failing to acknowledge the differences and divides that already exist. It reminds me of the argument that surrounds the phrase "color blind." While that was once a socially approved comment, in this day and age, it's considered a form of racism because it allows us to deny differences that actually exist.
Congrats to your son by the way. Medical training is a beating
Yes, this is a VERY interesting read and very relevant, and I agree with it to a large extent.
However, it is a fact that the wealthy have always been able to afford better education, better homes, etc. than the middle and lower classes, but this has been true thought history. Not many people can afford an Aston Martin, for example -- but so what? Is the author suggesting that differences in wealth, in socioeconomic class, are wrong, period? Unless we go to an equal-wealth-for-all-system, regardless of individual effort, that will always be the way things are. And the fact is that there are many, many people who were born to poor parents who are now very wealthy. (And by saying this, I am not saying anything new.) Sure, it is more likely that if one is "born rich", one will "die rich", but as is often said and acknowledged, life is not fair. Would the author prefer that private wealth be eliminated altogether?
Yes, I know that the title basically was meant to say that upper-middle and upper-class Americans should just admit that they ARE privileged -- and I don't think anyone disputes that idea -- but it also seems to me that the author was saying much more than that.
And, btw, why are there so many one- and two-sentence replies in this thread? I thought the Great Debates rules stipulate that replies and comments must be more in-depth than that.
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.
