3 ms·

Sorry, but you are not considering that many (most?) hospitals are trying to optimize for profit, not for their employees' or their customers' well-being. In th

by generic92034 2y ago

Sorry, but you are not considering that many (most?) hospitals are trying to optimize for profit, not for their employees' or their customers' well-being. In that scenario increasing the number of medical doctors does not help to improve the working situation for them, but it even endangers them, as they are easier to replace. Preventing overlong shifts and too many work-hours per week requires regulation. "The market" cannot provide this, unless there would be a miracle of medical staff unionizing to a great degree.

NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago
> Sorry, but you are not considering that many (most?) hospitals are trying to optimize for profit, And, in the grand scheme of things, hiring two doctors for 40 hours per week instead of one doctor for 80 hours a week does not change any bottom line. If they pursue the latter over the former, it is because finding any doctors at all to cover shifts is difficult... doctors are in short supply. By design. I considered this, it just didn't matter. > In that scenario increasing the number of medical doctors does not help to improve the working situation for them Again with this nonsense. That wasn't what we were discussing. We didn't start off with "how can we make overworked Indian pilots' lives better". And we didn't end up in "how can we make overworked US medical doctors' lives better". If there were a solution that made things safer (in either situation) while making the lives of those workers worse somehow, it would be worth discussing because their job performance affects many lives beyond their own. > Preventing overlong shifts and too many work-hours per week requires regulation. This is naive at best, but it's probably unintelligent. For essential work, where there is a small supply of workers qualified to perform the work, making sure that people don't work overlong shifts and endanger the public *actually requires expanding the pool of workers qualified to perform the work*. Unless, somehow, you think the supply is adequate and people with $300,000 in medical school debt have just decided to sit things out and do Uber because the hospital's too stressful. Do you somehow believe that? What evidence led you to believing that? Is your comprehension of economics so flimsy that you just assume that all supply of qualified, highly skilled workers in effectively infinite or at least indefinite in quantity? I feel like I'm talking to a spider monkey or maybe a marmot or something. How is this not obvious to you? What cognitive defect do you suffer from?

NoMoreNicksLeft 2y ago

> Sorry, but you are not considering that many (most?) hospitals are trying to optimize for profit, And, in the grand scheme of things, hiring two doctors for 40 hours per week instead of one doctor for 80 hours a week does not change any bottom line. If they pursue the latter over the former, it is because finding any doctors at all to cover shifts is difficult... doctors are in short supply. By design. I considered this, it just didn't matter. > In that scenario increasing the number of medical doctors does not help to improve the working situation for them Again with this nonsense. That wasn't what we were discussing. We didn't start off with "how can we make overworked Indian pilots' lives better". And we didn't end up in "how can we make overworked US medical doctors' lives better". If there were a solution that made things safer (in either situation) while making the lives of those workers worse somehow, it would be worth discussing because their job performance affects many lives beyond their own. > Preventing overlong shifts and too many work-hours per week requires regulation. This is naive at best, but it's probably unintelligent. For essential work, where there is a small supply of workers qualified to perform the work, making sure that people don't work overlong shifts and endanger the public *actually requires expanding the pool of workers qualified to perform the work*. Unless, somehow, you think the supply is adequate and people with $300,000 in medical school debt have just decided to sit things out and do Uber because the hospital's too stressful. Do you somehow believe that? What evidence led you to believing that? Is your comprehension of economics so flimsy that you just assume that all supply of qualified, highly skilled workers in effectively infinite or at least indefinite in quantity? I feel like I'm talking to a spider monkey or maybe a marmot or something. How is this not obvious to you? What cognitive defect do you suffer from?