Private schools are way more expensive at least where I am. It was a difference of 20k per year vs 50k per year.

I'd look it up but I just got to work and got shit to do

You tend to do all the work as a mid level provider and have the doctor sign off on it. I always utilize NPs because they tend to work harder than doctors per case. Scopes are so limited though and they seem unaware sometimes.

I could transition to this role with very little education from where I'm at. I already know all the medications ad nauseum.

I'm just not sure I could do all that listening.

This post was edited by Skinned on Apr 16 2020 11:54am

@bolded 1: Why would you do that if you want to increase the supply of doctors?

@bolded 2: It's not for everyone, but if its free, more people would do it. Same with everything.

I don't get why people choose business degrees when they could choose economics degrees. Basket weaving and women's studies, nice synonym.

This post was edited by dro94 on Apr 16 2020 12:03pm

you want to increase the flow, not flood the market. if its free we can assume a large increase over a 5-10 year period of premed majors, med entry exam takers, and then med schools themselves will increase by a certain degree. but you'd want it at a reasonable level.

and in any case im not necessarily advocating the things i said we could do, just saying IF it was too drastic of an increase and medical schools were over burdened these changes could be made to offset that.

of all of the things said in this thread Bazi's stat on the # of doctors that get their schooling paid for it the most poignant proof that being a doctor is heavily affected by privilege.

Med school entrance exams are already competitive as hell. A 70th percentile score 20 years ago would have been great, now you better get a 80th percentile to be considered.

Same with residency requirements.

The issue isn't with the supply of med students, there's like 10x more students applying than seats, the issue is the number of seats available.

yes, and if more applicants made it through undergrad and had cash for medi school (because it would be free or at least free undergrad) the number of good applicants would go up. and in turn med schools would increase their capacity. otherwise they're just throwing away money. if u change the meta u change the game.

Backed up the truck on large bank calls. They got woodsheded this week, crystal ball is telling me a bounce back trade is in order.

Also got lucky and bought some more BTC at 6500

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Apr 16 2020 12:20pm

Medical schools can't just "increase their capacity" when there are regulating bodies that have strict requirements for curriculum access and it's damn expensive to open lab space and class space for more students. There's currently several times more students applying than there are seats, if more spots could be opened, or the rate of opening could increase, it already would have.

Sometimes when you "change the game" there isn't a change that can be made because the change is already happening as fast as it can.

they could take more money and get less qualified people, then their reputation would go to shit. liability issues, etc.

the idea that some very smart people simply cant pay for med school implies that if paid for they might go that route.

whether it's the govt or person paying for it if they can get the money without incurring lawsuits they will.

does this mean med schools increasing acceptance by just a few %? maybe, especially short term. might just be a slight increase.

as to current regulating bodies, they're part of the game, and would change with meta. u think we'd overhaul the entire college payment meta without them getting affected? of course not.

You are basically saying

If X then Y
and
if Y then Z

X therefore Z

but I'm pointing out that Y already exists and Z isn't happening, so X will not lead to Z.

There are already a huge abundance of medical applicants, and it hasn't lead to an increase in medical school spots opening. Therefore, further increasing medical school applicants by reducing price will not lead to an increase in spots, because we already have an abundance of medical school applicants. There's a limiting factor elsewhere that is independent of the number of students, and it's in the cost of opening medical schools and the ability of hospitals to create competent residency programs.

Additionally, medical school admission standards have gone through the fucking roof in the last 20 years, commensurate with the huge increase in applicants. Truly we could over double the number of seats available and we still wouldn't need to reduce standards to the level that was adequate just 20 years ago.



However, this gets off track. My overall point was that in our current system we have a disproportionate share of the cost of education going to the person receiving it while society overall gets a disproportionate benefit. That benefit comes in the form of a more educated populace and a greater taxation in the life of the individual. If you want to dispute this then physicians are one of the worst examples because state medical schools reduce the cost of medical school by paying for a significant portion of tuition with tax dollars so they can absorb the public good of having physicians in their state, physicians that don't take advantage of this have huge burdens in loans placed on them, and the public takes an enormous amount of good from physicians relative to the amount of work the physician puts in (the tens of thousands of extra hours of training, when you account for this the hourly pay of physicians is really really low).

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Apr 16 2020 12:57pm