The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Considering millions of Americans' prior health plan was "don't get sick" - I think they'll view anything else as an improvement.

You forgot part two of the prior plan. Die quickly.

Both are cornerstones of the GOP alternative.

[unofan]

Yes, they may very well. Will the people who once had easier access to their PCP be appreciative of the new dynamic?

Probably not, just as there are plenty of straight, white, Christian, males out there that see every advance in civil rights as an attack on them. Losing privilege sucks for the privileged, even when it's the right thing to do.

Put another way, having more patients wanting to see doctors isn't an unintended problem, that was kind of the point.

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Probably not, just as there are plenty of straight, white, Christian, males out there that see every advance in civil rights as an attack on them. Losing privilege sucks for the privileged, even when it's the right thing to do.

Put another way, having more patients wanting to see doctors isn't an unintended problem, that was kind of the point.

There's a big difference between civil rights and affirmative action, the latter of which denies civil rights to people based upon their classification du jour.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Probably not, just as there are plenty of straight, white, Christian, males out there that see every advance in civil rights as an attack on them. Losing privilege sucks for the privileged, even when it's the right thing to do.

Put another way, having more patients wanting to see doctors isn't an unintended problem, that was kind of the point.

Yes, by way of law they created greater consumer base without having the provider space to handle the influx of new patients.

In other words, they created an outward shift of D without a commensurate outward shift in S. What are the possible results of something like that happening?

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Yes, by way of law they created greater consumer base without having the provider space to handle the influx of new patients.

In other words, they created an outward shift of D without a commensurate outward shift in S. What are the possible results of something like that happening?

And because "white guilt" is trendy right now, unofan's just trying to jump on the bandwagon.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

And because "white guilt" is trendy right now, unofan's just trying to jump on the bandwagon.

I'm ignoring the social commentary on the persecuted this or that, it had no place in this discussion. It's strictly a look at the numbers. Either prices are going to shoot up or shortages will ensue, it all depends upon the market. More specifically, it all depends upon how the government manipulates the market, will it allow prices to rise or find a way to get more PCP doctors into the system? After that it's a matter waiting for everyone to throw up their hands to shout that the market for this good doesn't work anymore.

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Yes, by way of law they created greater consumer base without having the provider space to handle the influx of new patients.

In other words, they created an outward shift of D without a commensurate outward shift in S. What are the possible results of something like that happening?

So you want the gubmint to create more doctors?

How does this sound? With more patients, doctors can either 1) schedule more appointments and make more $$$, 2) asign some visits to nurse practitioners, or 3) more people can go into the profession. Either way, the conservative rule that more people having no insurance is great because it lessens the burden on doctors is pretty effin nonsensical....

[unofan]

Yes, by way of law they created greater consumer base without having the provider space to handle the influx of new patients.

In other words, they created an outward shift of D without a commensurate outward shift in S. What are the possible results of something like that happening?

Again, since that was the point of the law (to increase D), you're arguing the law was successful. I'm sure the president is disappointed...

There has been and always will be a shortage of medical care, because there is inherently an almost infinite demand for it. If society decides to ration it on a basis other than employment or wealth, that's not necessarily a bad thing. There are market failures after all, even though certain posters on here will never admit to such things.

[St. Clown]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

So you want the gubmint to create more doctors?

How does this sound? With more patients, doctors can either 1) schedule more appointments and make more $$$, 2) asign some visits to nurse practitioners, or 3) more people can go into the profession. Either way, the conservative rule that more people having no insurance is great because it lessens the burden on doctors is pretty effin nonsensical....

In your two-year-old's debasement of an argument, yes, the government should create more doctors. We're screwing up the healthcare market this much, may as well go Full Monty on it and start paying for the schooling of doctors who choose to become PCPs. What we're going to see is overworked professionals who will either start missing appointments or shifting the burden to underqualified people. NPs and PAs are all well and good, but the public is best served when they report up to a doctor who can oversee their work. At what point do doctors top actually being physicians and instead become supervisors for NPs and PAs?

[WisconsinWildcard]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

In your two-year-old's debasement of an argument, yes, the government should create more doctors. We're screwing up the healthcare market this much, may as well go Full Monty on it and start paying for the schooling of doctors who choose to become PCPs. What we're going to see is overworked professionals who will either start missing appointments or shifting the burden to underqualified people. NPs and PAs are all well and good, but the public is best served when they report up to a doctor who can oversee their work. At what point do doctors top actually being physicians and instead become supervisors for NPs and PAs?

In a large way, we are paying for the school of doctors who become PCPs. However, it is repayment of loans (usually after ten years of service) and it is not guaranteed (for instance, a republican majority in house, senate and prez can easily slash the whole program with no thought to those who depended on it).

In short, we already have overworked professionals. A day in a PCP clinic is exhausting. They have to see tons of patients to make a decent living. Reimbursement is heavy on the procedure end and weak on the "talk to the actual patient" end.

[dxmnkd316]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

So, we can't get more doctors because they're overworked. But we need more doctors because they're already overworked?

[joecct]

So, we can't get more doctors because they're overworked. But we need more doctors because they're already overworked?

Catch 22.

[ericredaxe]

What we're going to see is overworked professionals who will either start missing appointments or shifting the burden to underqualified people. NPs and PAs are all well and good, but the public is best served when they report up to a doctor who can oversee their work.

At the highly specialized level I'd agree with this, but not so much at the urgent care / walk in clinic / PCP level. These are qualified trained people. How much oversight is really needed to treat bronchitis, ankle sprains, tick bites etc etc?

[Rover]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

At the highly specialized level I'd agree with this, but not so much at the urgent care / walk in clinic / PCP level. These are qualified trained people. How much oversight is really needed to treat bronchitis, ankle sprains, tick bites etc etc?

Exactly. If St. Clown has a rash that won't go away, he need not see guy who graduated top of his class at Harvard Medical School. If that reassessment of health care usage happens, its a good thing. The problem with knuckledragging on this issue is that its continually been proven wrong on its predictions, so now its flailing to find anything to latch onto. Either Rush, Hannity, or Levin has directed people like Clown, joecct, Fishy, etc to start beating the "no access to care" drum despite no evidence that this is a problem caused by the ACA. Like death panels, more people will be uninsured, this bill will be a job killer, and it will cause a spike in the deficit, this one will too prove to be nonsense.

[Kepler]

Re: The PPACA Thread Part III - Let's have a healthy debate!

Exactly. If St. Clown has a rash that won't go away, he need not see guy who graduated top of his class at Harvard Medical School.

Depends on the rash...