<p>Does anybody have a problem with universal healthcare bringing down the salary of a doctor?</p>
<p>Although I would hope most of us/you aren't in it for the money...how drastic do you think the hit would be were a democratic candidate to socialize healthcare?</p>
<p>[Pleaasee don't spawn into a universal vs. non-universal healthcare argument, pleeaase]</p>
<p>I'm interested in this issue as well, not just about the salary, but also about how it would affect the lives of doctors, how medicine would change etc. </p>
<p>I've heard some negative things about the socialized healthcare systems in Canada and Britain (such as 4+ month waits for non-emergency procedures, the government not paying enough for doctors to do procedures, overworked healthcare employees, and sending people here to the U.S. for treatment).</p>
<p>Personally, I am against the idea of implementing a universal healthcare plan here in the U.S. Plans that Obama and Clinton have proposed are extremely expensive, which I don't think the economy can handle right now. We are a long ways away from finding an effective solution to our healthcare problems. I think the IDEA of a universal plan is great, but not realistic.</p>
<p>Any thoughts?</p>
<p>Considering how overly expensive health care is now I am ready and willing to try universal health care. It can not come to soon. Sure there will be some transitional issues but when the US is one of the few developed countries who haven't implemented this yet it is not like we will be blazing a new trail. </p>
<p>I think the insurance and drug companies (and perhaps the AMA) want the public to think how bad it might be to instill fear into people. Having a universal system would seem to be much more effiecent rather than scores of health plans like we have today. We already have universal health care for those over 65 and that probably accounts for 1/3 of all the spending already. Also we would see more uniform pricing whereas now if you don't have insurance coverage you will get charged subtantially more - often 4 to almost 10 times more - than what the insurance prices are for the same thing. How in the world that makes sense to anyone is beyond me. In any other business it would be called fraud. </p>
<p>Healthcare in America has gone big business so watch your pocketbook and be prepared for an attemped rape by hospitals and sadly even doctors. Universal healthcare would solve many of these current problems and potentially put the doctors back to doing what they were trained to do which is take care of their patients. A side benefit might be restored trust in doctors again.</p>
<p>Did medical profession exist before health insurance or health insurance existed before medical profession?</p>
<p>The medical profession has existed far longer than insurance... insurance has only been around since about the middle of last century, and even then, it has gone through myriad changes.</p>
<p>And before health insurance companies interfere with our health, doctors and pharmacists made a decent living and had a lot of respect from patients. Now doctors, pharmacists, nurses, and patients all complain about insurance companies. Why should we keep the insurance companies?</p>
<p>Doctors aren't forced to accept insurance. They can demand their patients to pay cash if they want.</p>
<p>A couple thoughts:</p>
<p>1) Access to care is the number one issue for me at this point - and something I didn't recognize about the situation (or care about) until I got to medical school. When you compare the outcomes data for those with insurance vs those without, it's disgusting, and absolutely unacceptable. Just having the option to see a physician regularly has a substantial impact on health.</p>
<p>2) Delays for procedures and CT scans and what not that are always used to say why socialized medicine is bad, won't happen here in the US. The investment in health care infrastructure in this country so far outpaces those other countries that it's a near impossibility that those problems would arise. I mean, I attend medical school in a rural state, and even the town of 2200 in which I did my family medicine clerkship had a 4 slice/sec CT scanner and an endoscopy suite that was entirely HD. </p>
<p>3) The VA system is socialized medicine in this country. There are some quirks in the way things are done there, but if you need an operation, it gets done in a reasonable timeframe.</p>
<p>4) Just because we change the way in which people pay for their coverage isn't going to change the demands that patients place on their physicians. Culture matters, and there are plenty of things that happen in other countries that won't happen here because of that.</p>
<p>5) I wonder how anyone can think it's a good idea that we allow companies directly involved in their client's health to run as for profit enterprises. I know that's my idealism shining through, but it seems incredibly problematic at every level to me.</p>
<p>Universal health care can only drive up the demand for medical professionals in this country. Bringing up demand while keeping the supply the same means salaries for doctors will skyrocket. I have relatives in the medical field in Australia, and that is the case over there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Universal health care can only drive up the demand for medical professionals in this country. Bringing up demand while keeping the supply the same means salaries for doctors will skyrocket. I have relatives in the medical field in Australia, and that is the case over there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That sort of supply vs. demand argument only works in a free market... the whole point of universal health care is to regulate the situation and bring costs (including salaries) under control and get the most bang for taxpayer buck. If you think universal healthcare "means salaries for doctors will skyrocket" you're seriously mistaken and are in for a huge disappointment.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Doctors aren't forced to accept insurance. They can demand their patients to pay cash if they want.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's simply not practical in most cases apart from quick-e-mart style 'emergency medicine' clinics and botox injecting vanity practices. Furthermore there are serious ethical issues with this quote too. Physicians are required by oath to treat those that come before them... not just those that will pay cash. Any physician that truly believes their oath should be amongst those out pushing to ensure everyone has access to care... not saying 'well if you can't pay cash then I won't treat you.'</p>
<p>I think the basic fundamental point is that a free market for-profit system just isn't compatible with a system where everyone has equal access to the same quality of care. No matter how you slice it, those with more money (e.g. paying more taxes) will have to supplement those that have less money. For things like heathcare this is the right thing to do. HMOs and insurance companies will, of course, not want to provide coverage to lower income segments because their premiums will never come close to paying for their cost to the HMO. </p>
<p>As any physician who has Medicare patients will tell you, a standardized government system will focus efforts on getting the maximum amount of medical care for the smallest amount of taxpayer money. Therefore, it's almost certain that future pressures on physician salaries will be negative. </p>
<p>I think we can quite confidently assume there won't be major increases. Whether there are decreases, and if so by how much, is not as clear. But in the future when most of a physician's salary comes, indirectly, from the taxpayers it's safe to say that the average person isn't going to shed a tear if someone making much more than they do cries about not getting paid enough.</p>