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.
I only have anecdotal evidence. I just assumed that most do since all of the ones that I know live close to me and I don't see how they could afford to live in the area on less than that. If they make less than 300K a year, why go through that much education? I think it is at least eight years of hard work.
You ask why go through all that school etc? Not to sound cliche, but doctors, nurses, cnas, etc, do it because we actually care about people, and helping them. I work in a level one trauma unit, the doctors here in trauma don't make 300k a year. I can't speak for N.Y. or Beverly Hills etc. A doctor who has a specialty, say a Caridac surgeon, well, if he or she does 5 cabgs a week, I can see 300K easy. For a physician the money is in procedures. I didn't mean to go off, and to you I apologize. The family practice doctor, the general care doctor, even the hospitalist, does not come close to 300k. When I was doing what is called "travel nursing" in FL, at a level one trauma flight nurse, I made more than the hospitalist who worked for the hospital. Now please remember as a travel nurse I had no insurance, no benefits at all, no overhead for the hospital.
Have a good weekend and spend some of that millions!
Last edited by Iluvmycountry; 07-14-2012 at 12:14 PM..
You ask why go through all that school etc? Not to sound cliche, but doctors, nurses, cnas, etc, do it because we actually care about people, and helping them. I work in a level one trauma unit, the doctors here in trauma don't make 300k a year. I can't speak for N.Y. or Beverly Hills etc. A doctor who has a specialty, say a Caridac surgeon, well, if he or she does 5 cabgs a week, I can see 300K easy. For a physician the money is in procedures. I didn't mean to go off, and to you I apologize. The family practice doctor, the general care doctor, even the hospitalist, does not come close to 300k. When I was doing what is called "travel nursing" in FL, at a level one trauma flight nurse, I made more than the hospitalist who worked for the hospital. Now please remember as a travel nurse I had no insurance, no benefits at all, no overhead for the hospital.
Have a good weekend and spend some of that millions!
I know only one GP. I just assumed that he got paid more because of where he lives, but now that I think of it his wife had money before they were married so maybe that explains it. He has always been very nice about coming to the house if I needed something. I did not want to insult him by offering to pay him. I will have to do that next time he calls in a prescription for me. The other doctors in the area are specialists. I guess specialists get paid more. Why would a person want to be a GP if specialists get paid more...all else being equal?
Limit medicare and medicaid patients to generic meds
So, if the patient is poor or no generic equivalent exists, too bad, so sad
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
Medical review panels ... malpractice ...
Malpractice is originated at the patient level. Those pesky patients.
Now on to post #126
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
...drive down consumption
Less is more. As a cost cutting suggestion you just asked patients to stay away
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
...direct cash payments ...
Another cost cutting idea laid at the feet of the patient.
OK, so the word blame might not have been my best choice. But, as I read your responses I still see a pattern there. Its those freeloading pesky patients.
After reading most of your fixes I cannot help but remember a scene from the movie Clerks. The two main characters, both clerks, are talking and one says " You know, this job wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the customers".
I am loving all these Saturday morning quarterbacks. Please show me the statistics you have to indicate doctors make 300K a year. Your BS statement "If doctors" does that mean all doctors? I can't wait to see your documentation. I'll bet you can guess why I can't wait to see it. Because if you were to produce any form of documentation stating all doctors make 300k, then I would call you a liar.
Here is a sampling of physician salaries. Of course, this says nothing about any individual doc.
So, if the patient is poor or no generic equivalent exists, too bad, so sad
Malpractice is originated at the patient level. Those pesky patients.
Now on to post #126
Less is more. As a cost cutting suggestion you just asked patients to stay away
Another cost cutting idea laid at the feet of the patient.
OK, so the word blame might not have been my best choice. But, as I read your responses I still see a pattern there. Its those freeloading pesky patients.
After reading most of your fixes I cannot help but remember a scene from the movie Clerks. The two main characters, both clerks, are talking and one says " You know, this job wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't for the customers".
1. PAY MORE? NO!!!!!! higher deductible insurance allows patients to PAY LESS for insurance. The higher deductible allows the patient to make more rational decisions when deciding when and when not to pursue certain medical options. For example, we have MANY patients who nearly demand an MRI, even when it is not medically indicated at all. If there was a higher deductible, more patients would be more willing to follow actual medical advice as when and when not to order imaging, which is a HUGE COST in medicine. Witness the massive increase in spending on medical imaging.
2. If the patient is poor and no generic medicine exists, so sad, too bad? Yes, that is about the size of it. Currently there are MANY DRUGS that are not covered via medicare and medicaid. Are these essential life saving drugs? No- there are "experimental" drugs which are restricted, but essentially NO INSURANCE COMPANY PAYS FOR THEM.
3. Malpractice IS INITIATED at the patient level. If a physician REALLY SCREWS up, it is naughty doc, not naughty patient. However, most scrupulous lawyers do not take "bad" cases, which are essentially frivilous, as they will not make any money on them. I can say that the lawyers I have dealt with (sending cases for review) are pretty practical, decent people and they do not want to take cases in which they have a low probability of success.
Who is more likely to sue? Indigent, uneducated patients. In those cases, yes- naughty patient. However, sometimes when errors occur, a physician DESERVES TO BE SUED. Why?
a. malpractice cases are reported to the Board and alert them to problems they may otherwise be unaware of.
b. if a physician has multiple malpractice cases, they can become uninsurable, removing them from practice before a medical board does so
c. encourages other physicians to be cautious, yet increases costs by over ordering labs and imaging
d. makes a patient "whole" when someone screws up
4. Cost cutting? OF COURSE WE NEED COST CUTTING. Again, the majority of medicare expenses occur on patients in their last three months of life. Is that a rational use of resources? Everyone DOES NOT NEED AN MRI for every ache and pain. We over-order imaging as a CYA tactic.
We must CUT COSTS in order to keep services such as medicare and medicaid even viable. Cutting costs does not always mean cutting quality. I think what I have outlined delineates that quite well. Excellent examples of increase utilization cutting costs would be -
a. colon scopes
b. blood pressure checks
c. PSA levels in 50 year old plus males
d. vaccinations
e. smoking and weight loss cessation programs
f. annual physical exams
g. checking A1C levels in diabetics
All of those measures SAVE MONEY in the long run, rather than resorting to expensive, "emergent" measures to address a problem which could have been prevented.
Keep in mind that eventually, all of us die, and that cannot be prevented. The best that we can do is try to extend healthy lives and make life more pleasant. We cannot change the fact that we are organic critters who will eventually "decay" and deteriorate.
I still see no reason why obamacare was passed. Basically it does nothing other than inject the federal bureaucracy into every aspect of it which is what they wanted. The only thing it actually does is create a pool for folks with pre existing conditions. Why didn't they just address that aspect? Because they wouldn't allow them to control everyone.
OK, you have, just in this post, offered actual cost cutting options. Up until this point I have only read one, and I repeat, one, real option at cutting the cost of healthcare. Medicine. You have offered several options on reducing health insurance, but that never addresses the actual cost of healthcare. Just the cost of health insurance... which is a good thing, but not applicable in regards to the cost of healthcare itself. Specifically I am talking about the $2000 ER visit, the $20 aspirin, etc..
But by and large, as I pointed out in my last post, you seem to focus on the patient as the way to cut costs. And in almost every measure you propose the patient pays more. More is less?
The higher deductible/lower premium issue may very well be a push. My premium cost me less, yes, but my actual care cost goes up due to an increase in deductible. And I understand your reasoning, as it will deter unnecessary procedures. And it would certainly benefit someone like me. But as it has been pointed out, I am no where near the norm ( humor, coming atcha). Most people visit the doctor more than once every fifteen years or so. Some people probably fifteen times a year or more.
In regards to malpractice I must admit that I am short on knowledge regarding this topic. But, as a matter of record, I have not, nor anyone that I intimately know has ever filed a malpractice claim. I have no choice but to assume that the malpractice condition is what it is because of some set of circumstances. If you are trying to say that the legal field, specifically the edge of ridiculous legal practices, have run amok, you will get no argument here. Unfortunately that is happening everywhere, not just in the medical field.
I think I remember you saying that you do not accept medicare. I certainly remember you saying that you would not accept ACA participants. You chose only patients will higher deductible insurances so you are shorted less. So, in essence, you really have no dog in this fight. And up until this post, with all due respect, your proposed healthcare cost suggestions really were not about cutting the costs of healthcare at all. At least that is what I took out of it. In fact, the bulk of your measures simple added cost to the patient.
This is a complex situation that goes way beyond what I am comfortable discussing. In other words, I simply do not know enough to go point to point with you. But based on our conversation so far, I am not so sure I am willing to implement your plan. In fact I am sure of it. With all due respect.
OK, you have, just in this post, offered actual cost cutting options. Up until this point I have only read one, and I repeat, one, real option at cutting the cost of healthcare. Medicine. You have offered several options on reducing health insurance, but that never addresses the actual cost of healthcare. Just the cost of health insurance... which is a good thing, but not applicable in regards to the cost of healthcare itself. Specifically I am talking about the $2000 ER visit, the $20 aspirin, etc..
But by and large, as I pointed out in my last post, you seem to focus on the patient as the way to cut costs. And in almost every measure you propose the patient pays more. More is less?
The higher deductible/lower premium issue may very well be a push. My premium cost me less, yes, but my actual care cost goes up due to an increase in deductible. And I understand your reasoning, as it will deter unnecessary procedures. And it would certainly benefit someone like me. But as it has been pointed out, I am no where near the norm ( humor, coming atcha). Most people visit the doctor more than once every fifteen years or so. Some people probably fifteen times a year or more.
In regards to malpractice I must admit that I am short on knowledge regarding this topic. But, as a matter of record, I have not, nor anyone that I intimately know has ever filed a malpractice claim. I have no choice but to assume that the malpractice condition is what it is because of some set of circumstances. If you are trying to say that the legal field, specifically the edge of ridiculous legal practices, have run amok, you will get no argument here. Unfortunately that is happening everywhere, not just in the medical field.
I think I remember you saying that you do not accept medicare. I certainly remember you saying that you would not accept ACA participants. You chose only patients will higher deductible insurances so you are shorted less. So, in essence, you really have no dog in this fight. And up until this post, with all due respect, your proposed healthcare cost suggestions really were not about cutting the costs of healthcare at all. At least that is what I took out of it. In fact, the bulk of your measures simple added cost to the patient.
This is a complex situation that goes way beyond what I am comfortable discussing. In other words, I simply do not know enough to go point to point with you. But based on our conversation so far, I am not so sure I am willing to implement your plan. In fact I am sure of it. With all due respect.
Good luck to you, Doc
No- you did not read my posts.I am growing tired of repeating myself and stating the same points, over and over again, which are simply ignored. Yet requests come for the very same points again. Here are my cost cutting options-
1. generic medicines DO CUT COSTS
2. By increasing deductibles, one reduces demand for healthcare. With reduced demand, comes reduced prices.
3. Allowing the insured to buy policies over state lines increases competition and drives down premium costs.
4. I discussed "insurance discounts" for compliant patients
5. I discussed marked limitations on malpractice, which would reduce the exponential increase in medical imaging and lab expenses.
6. Medicaid copays would prevent the $2,000 ambulence ride for a cold.
7. Limits on medicare expenses in the last three months of life. This accounts for the majority of all medicare expenses.
Apparently the above seven points were lost to you, as I have stated them now for the fourth time. Funny- my kids get angry at me when I repeat myself several times. However, I tell them that MOST PEOPLE do not listen and you really need to tell them something several times. We are trained to do so in medicine, such that people, at some point in the conversation, may understand.
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.
