5 ms·
> This is caused by the AMA lobbying to limit the supply of doctors in order to drive up salaries. This. This is the problem - not the vague spectre of "capita
by throw10920 5y ago
> This is caused by the AMA lobbying to limit the supply of doctors in order to drive up salaries.
This. This is the problem - not the vague spectre of "capitalism" being waved around.
- FollowingTheDao 5y agoSince when do salaries have nothing to do with capitalism?
- JamesBarney 5y agoThe Soviet Union had wages to, and far worse problems with shortages then capitalistic countries have ever had.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- e-dt 5y agoYes, but not in general shortages of doctors. It's a totally different problem, so this isn't really a helpful way to look at it. After all, if there's a shortage of cabbages, it doesn't mean the remaining cabbages benefit and can lobby to keep it that way!
- bryanlarsen 5y agoCabbage farmers can, though.
- e-dt 4y agoYes, but when that sort of thing happens in commodities it's an illegal cartel, whereas when it happens with jobs it's responsible self-regulation by a professional association.
- jacobr1 5y agoThe presumption is that under a "free market" the demand would drive more production - more doctors. But that the rules of the current system artificially restrict the supply of doctors. Some of that we want - credentials clearly serve a purpose - yet are the rules more restrictive than they should be? Should there be more residencies? Should we have more "lower-level" providers like nurse-practitioners, PAs or pharmacists that can prescribe? There is limited ability for the market to innovate in such a regulated environment.
- WalterSear 5y agoSince people refuse to see regulatory capture as an unavoidable feature of capitalism.
- throw10920 5y agoBecause it's factually not. At least, unless you define "capitalism" in a specific twisted way that includes "regulatory capture". Which I suppose a lot of socialists do...