It is interesting you bring up the AMA union because the discussion in the AMA mirrors the discussion that goes on in my profession, land surveying. Every year the land surveyors talk about the lack of surveyors and how we should solve it by weakening the standards and letting anybody (or more) practice. The issue has always led to the fact that if you loosen the standards for a profession, you generally get more people whose qualifications, knowledge, and expertise are “questionable.”
So I actually do side with the AMA because of their standards and honestly with the life and death issue we should have good standards. For my profession, at least the question of loosening standards is not a life or death issue. For doctors, it is.
But I do agree with you that it would be nice to increase the numbers of people in medical school, open up more medical schools, and help pay for the providers’ educations. However, here is the sticking point: what would the purpose of this be for? The people you put into these schools can’t make enough money to pay for their long education because “for profit” is bad! Why should anyone stick out school for 8 years plus pretty bad pay for a few years so that they can become a doctor?
Here’s the flip side of your medicare argument. Maybe the reason why there isn’t any private insurance for it available is because the government is doing it. In many instances, competition with the government is a losing battle. That’s why most companies prefer not to do it.
Consider also that many doctors refuse to take any Medicare patients. By directing medicare towards the entire population of the United States, this situation will be common place, and there will be fewer providers.
[quote=CA renter]
Seriously, there is no evidence that shows our system is in any way superior to a “socialized” system. To the contrary, everything I’ve ever seen shows that socialized medicine is superior to our for-profit system. If you or anyone else has **evidence** to the contrary, I’d love to see it.[/quote]
One of the things that has made America great is that there is a general recognition that profiteers (yes, for-profits) are generally the most efficient model for creating innovation and reducing costs.
Well, as for this assertion, here is something to ponder:
“The results are clear: Since 1970 — even without the prescription drug benefit — Medicare’s costs have risen 34% more, per patient, than the combined costs of all health care in America apart from Medicare and Medicaid, the vast majority of which is purchased through the private sector.
Since 1970, the per-patient costs of all health care apart from Medicare and Medicaid have risen from $364 to $7,119, while Medicare’s per-patient costs have risen from $368 to $9,634. Medicare’s costs have risen $2,511 more per patient.”
Not exactly a counter to your argument, but it does seem to show that a private sector driven solution would be a heck of a lot better than the government.
