4 ms·

Bit insulting to be called a pig - also why would you want more pigs at the trough if this is a problem? Anyway NPs and PAs are providing the majority of care i

Bit insulting to be called a pig - also why would you want more pigs at the trough if this is a problem? Anyway NPs and PAs are providing the majority of care in hospitals. Please, let “AI” come. My EMR is basically run through telnet (no joke) because the hospital system (biggest in the US) does not want to upgrade. “Trial lawyer awards” are capped in several states including CA. I can tell you that more than 75% of my medical school class was not in it for the money, for what it’s worth.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago
I know several doctors. The ones that GP / Family practice are in it for the "right reasons". The specialists, the two I know probably make 700k and up, are superficially in it to "help people" but it is apparent they love the money. Radiology, Cardiology, and AssDocs. US specialists make far too much money, especially considering that GPs barely make 100k sometimes, but for two extra years you get 6-7x the salary? Come on. I worked at a drug/device company. It started out in a garage and was originally a "morally run company". But it had long devolved into an MBA enshittified acquisition-deal company. I worked at a major insurance company. They can't for public reasons show TOO much of a profit, which is PERFECT for the MBAs running that company, because they hoover up all the excess in a bloated executive structure and embarrassingly huge bonuses. Never worked for a law firm. I generally assume them to be the smallest pig, the runt, which is useful for the other pigs to bully and blame for everything.
- throwaway4220 3y ago
  Learn statistics, or talk to more doctors. https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/how-much-do-doctors-make/ https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/how-much-do-doctors-make/
  - AtlasBarfed 3y ago
    Uh, your article basically confirms what I was saying: specialists get paid crazy amounts, so the motivation of doctors when they hit the real world is to specialize. But gp is where you do preventative care to avoid the specialists.
    - throwaway4220 3y ago
      "6-7x" over "100k" you were claiming earlier is not right. mean specialist versus PCP is ~50k on average, with huge regional variability. Your second point is right, so what are you gonna do? Make a medical system where preventative care and quality of care are valued? Then you'll get called a "communist" who wants "death camps" and get your birthplace questioned. So here we are. In the 70s and 80s, I'm told general practitioners made more money then specialists, something I agree with. But even now, lots of people want to do general practice. The smartest person in my med school class went into pediatrics because she loved it. Money is not the biggest motivator for speciality choice, but it is one. Isn't this the case in literally every other field? Maybe SWEs who are full stack get paid more or something?
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  >I worked at a major insurance company. They can't for public reasons show TOO much of a profit, which is PERFECT for the MBAs running that company, because they hoover up all the excess in a bloated executive structure and embarrassingly huge bonuses. Nonsense if you read the SEC filings and compare health insurance executive compensation to other business' executives that lead similar number of employees and revenue. Try to make sense for why people getting paid in equity would want to lower their own compensation by hiding profit. Across the entire industry, at least 7 publicly listed businesses (UNH/Elevance/CVS/Cigna/Humana/Centene/Molina). That would be a very impressive collusion scheme, if they can pull that off maybe they deserve it.
  - AtlasBarfed 3y ago
    Uhc for example keeps profit low, they grow the equity value by increasing revenues. They also tried the famous stick option backdating. Insurance company profurs are in the 5-15% range. Drug/device can be in the 50-100% range depending on what patent monopoly they are riding. But the health insurance companies operate regional monopolies or duopolies, which they achieve with vertical integration with hospital networks. Health insurance knows they are riding a delicate balancing act. The entire first world besides the us has social health care. They all have better outcomes and vastly reduced costs. They are pure corruption. So they can't show the drug device profit margins. They have to look like the hood guys who push down costs from the evil drug companies and those know it all doctors/ama.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      These claims are all over the place, and false. Insurance profit margins are 2% to 4%, with the exception of UNH which is ~6%. Medicine company profit margins are 20% to 30%. All publicly available information. Most importantly, though, is you would need to show what incentive an executive of a publicly listed business would have to show less profit rather than more profit (net income). Investors pay higher prices for shares of more highly profitable businesses, and executives get paid in shares. So claiming that a publicly listed business chooses to somehow hide less net income (ignoring the claim of fraud), first you would have to provide the incentive for why executives would want to earn less.
DANmode 3y ago
They don't have to be in it for the money - they know it's coming, even if they're garbage. That's what the "restricted supply" bit is about. Even the worst, most harmful doctors I've come across are making more than everyone else I know.
BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago
Are you saying you’re a doctor? The comment didn’t direct that insult at doctors.

AtlasBarfed 3y ago

I know several doctors. The ones that GP / Family practice are in it for the "right reasons". The specialists, the two I know probably make 700k and up, are superficially in it to "help people" but it is apparent they love the money. Radiology, Cardiology, and AssDocs. US specialists make far too much money, especially considering that GPs barely make 100k sometimes, but for two extra years you get 6-7x the salary? Come on. I worked at a drug/device company. It started out in a garage and was originally a "morally run company". But it had long devolved into an MBA enshittified acquisition-deal company. I worked at a major insurance company. They can't for public reasons show TOO much of a profit, which is PERFECT for the MBAs running that company, because they hoover up all the excess in a bloated executive structure and embarrassingly huge bonuses. Never worked for a law firm. I generally assume them to be the smallest pig, the runt, which is useful for the other pigs to bully and blame for everything.

throwaway4220 3y ago
Learn statistics, or talk to more doctors. https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/how-much-do-doctors-make/ https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/how-much-do-doctors-make/
- AtlasBarfed 3y ago
  Uh, your article basically confirms what I was saying: specialists get paid crazy amounts, so the motivation of doctors when they hit the real world is to specialize. But gp is where you do preventative care to avoid the specialists.
  - throwaway4220 3y ago
    "6-7x" over "100k" you were claiming earlier is not right. mean specialist versus PCP is ~50k on average, with huge regional variability. Your second point is right, so what are you gonna do? Make a medical system where preventative care and quality of care are valued? Then you'll get called a "communist" who wants "death camps" and get your birthplace questioned. So here we are. In the 70s and 80s, I'm told general practitioners made more money then specialists, something I agree with. But even now, lots of people want to do general practice. The smartest person in my med school class went into pediatrics because she loved it. Money is not the biggest motivator for speciality choice, but it is one. Isn't this the case in literally every other field? Maybe SWEs who are full stack get paid more or something?
lotsofpulp 3y ago
>I worked at a major insurance company. They can't for public reasons show TOO much of a profit, which is PERFECT for the MBAs running that company, because they hoover up all the excess in a bloated executive structure and embarrassingly huge bonuses. Nonsense if you read the SEC filings and compare health insurance executive compensation to other business' executives that lead similar number of employees and revenue. Try to make sense for why people getting paid in equity would want to lower their own compensation by hiding profit. Across the entire industry, at least 7 publicly listed businesses (UNH/Elevance/CVS/Cigna/Humana/Centene/Molina). That would be a very impressive collusion scheme, if they can pull that off maybe they deserve it.
- AtlasBarfed 3y ago
  Uhc for example keeps profit low, they grow the equity value by increasing revenues. They also tried the famous stick option backdating. Insurance company profurs are in the 5-15% range. Drug/device can be in the 50-100% range depending on what patent monopoly they are riding. But the health insurance companies operate regional monopolies or duopolies, which they achieve with vertical integration with hospital networks. Health insurance knows they are riding a delicate balancing act. The entire first world besides the us has social health care. They all have better outcomes and vastly reduced costs. They are pure corruption. So they can't show the drug device profit margins. They have to look like the hood guys who push down costs from the evil drug companies and those know it all doctors/ama.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    These claims are all over the place, and false. Insurance profit margins are 2% to 4%, with the exception of UNH which is ~6%. Medicine company profit margins are 20% to 30%. All publicly available information. Most importantly, though, is you would need to show what incentive an executive of a publicly listed business would have to show less profit rather than more profit (net income). Investors pay higher prices for shares of more highly profitable businesses, and executives get paid in shares. So claiming that a publicly listed business chooses to somehow hide less net income (ignoring the claim of fraud), first you would have to provide the incentive for why executives would want to earn less.

DANmode 3y ago

They don't have to be in it for the money - they know it's coming, even if they're garbage. That's what the "restricted supply" bit is about. Even the worst, most harmful doctors I've come across are making more than everyone else I know.

BriggyDwiggs42 3y ago

Are you saying you’re a doctor? The comment didn’t direct that insult at doctors.