6 ms·
It's enough not only for that, but to gradually expand the number of students they can afford to admit tuition-free into the future (strictly on interest), as w
by anonym29 3y ago
It's enough not only for that, but to gradually expand the number of students they can afford to admit tuition-free into the future (strictly on interest), as well, should the desire to do so ever arise.
- delfinom 3y agoGiven that the AMA cartel sets artificial quotas on med school admissions per school, it's not that simple lol
- verteu 3y agoI don't think that's accurate. From my research, the bottleneck is residencies, whose funding is determined by Congress [1]. The AMA has supported laws to increase residencies, such as "H.R. 2389/S. 1302, the Resident Physician Shortage Reduction Act" [2]. The paper "Physician workforce in the United States of America: forecasting nationwide shortages" [3] mainly blames an aging population and too-slow growth in the number of "residents and fellows". edit: Found a dissenting view here [4], its main reference seems to be [5]. [1] https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/04/13/were-short-on-healthcare-workers-why-doesnt-the-u-s-just-make-more-doctors/ https://www.washingtonian.com/2020/04/13/were-short-on-healt... [2] https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2024-nac-action-kit-gme-physician-workforce.pdf https://www.ama-assn.org/system/files/2024-nac-action-kit-gm... [3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7006215/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7006215/ [4] https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/11/its-doctors-who-control-number-doctors-america-not-government/ https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2013/11/its-doctors-w... [5] https://washingtonmonthly.com/2013/06/19/first-teach-no-harm/ https://washingtonmonthly.com/2013/06/19/first-teach-no-harm...
- bradleyjg 3y ago> whose funding is determined by Congress There’s no law forbidding you, a state government, a local government, an insurance company, the AARP, or anyone else from funding a residency.
- verteu 3y agoGood point - I don't see why they're subsidized by the federal gvt at all, rather than the resident, the hospital, the AMA, etc.
- whatshisface 3y agoMed students don't have a lot of money, and hospitals are actually there (from their perspective, at least) to make money. The AMA doesn't have a lot of extra money either.
- bradleyjg 3y agoThey don’t have a lot of money yet. They have a very high amount of lifetime earning potential compared to their peers in other countries (yes, even after debt service and malpractice insurance.)
- esoleyman 3y agoAre you seriously asking residents to subsidize their own training working 60-80 hours a week [1] and being paid maybe $20-25/hr for 3-7 years while the hospitals make money from their services? If that were the case, then the only ones who would put up with such a system would be those who have rich families to back them up. I came from a blue collar background and my family could not help subsidize my training and I could not afford to live, make rent, or afford food if I had to pay for my training as well. There are so many other things that you are completely glossing over including annual income between generalists vs specialists, pediatricians vs non-pediatricians, reimbursement inequality from Medicare (has not kept up with inflation and is ~40% below inflation), Medicaid pays at best 10-15% on the dollar, and so on. American physicians also work almost teice as many hours as their European counterparts which would increase their incomes. [1] it’s considerably more because if you report it then the program can be in danger and lose its credentialing
- tastyfreeze 3y ago