The problem isn't so much producing more doctors, but making it a viable career path. A doctor comes out of school with a mountain of debt, and very little earning ability. A few "get rich", most work themselves to death trying to pay the bills, pay the staff, pay the student loan, pay the insurance, etc.

Many (most?) leave private gate practice and go with a group where they have lower expenses, but a huge work load and little satisfaction.

Yes, if everyone in their own minds viewed healthcare as a right, not a privilege, the mechanisms to accomplish at least basic healthcare for all would be easier to work on.

People are really missing the target when it comes to evaluating healthcare costs. The elephant in the room is the rise in costs after the healthcare sector went public. How many of you own some type of healthcare stock? For every service or product provided, the cost has to be padded significantly to feed the stockholders who provide nothing.

The healthcare sector in the market took a big hit when the talk of Medicare for All started his spring. How did we, as Americans, allow the “something for nothing” stock market into the healthcare for all of us? The only profit required in medical care should be strictly for education, maintenance, development and employment of top notch medical personnel.

Someone sitting on their sofa making money off the medical issues of fellow citizens is revolting to me. There are plenty of other “something for nothing “ stocks in which to invest.

Medical healthcare should not be a public stock ever.

So, companies that develop and manufacture medical instrumentation do not have a right to make a profit and reward the stock holders who put their money at risk? Really?

"For profit" companies competing for business brings the cost of everything down, not up. This applies to all products and services, not just health care. Remember the 800 dollar hammer that the Government bought? Today, you can buy one at Walmart for less than 4 dollars.

“Put your money at risk in healthcare sector”, oxymoron. The only risk is if Medicare for All is implemented. Those healthcare stocks are swinging high, if you follow the market at all. I listed where the profits can be manifested. Of course, the company and any employees are entitled to a reasonable profit and you know that wasn’t what was being said.

Stockholders out on the golf course, fishing on their boat, traveling through Europe, etc. are a sad group when you realize their ill-gotten gains are from the backs of citizens in health and financial crisis or misery. I have no problem with your WalMart profits or those profits made from anything other than basic health which we should all be able to enjoy. We will be judged on that some day.

Do you realize that companies making the instruments you cite can produce the same without you? But their CEO’s and boards wouldn’t be making $5 million and more a year.

The ACA requires all employers with more than 50 employees to provide affordable health insurance for their employees. How would a public option fit into that requirement? I suspect that, if you take away the employer requirement, then employers would cancel the insurance and require their employees to sign up for the public option, thereby taking away the "option".

They only have to offer it. And that is only for full-time permanent employees. Part timers and seasonal employees aren't entitled to any health insurance.

I like the ACA. it has filled some gaps and protects those with pre existing conditions. Not perfect but way better than nothing.


Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

The AMA limits the number of doctors who graduate? Who knew? But not true.