Thanks for all of the liberal spin, but in the rush to politicize it, you are missing the fact that this all adds to the cost of the system, which is the whole point. As earlier when you all were comparing total costs, to total costs, this all factors in. None of that is as a result of health insurance. Health insurance is a result of all of the costs. Until costs are dealt with, health insurance isn't going to get any cheaper.

 

How are my comments about legal malpractice law in Illinois "liberal spin"?

What's funny is that anymore these "experts" are being ignored by juries. I was just talking to a guy the other day that lost a jury trial and while interviewing the jury they all said they knew the experts were hired guns saying the opposite things, so they didn't really take their testimony into consideration like they would a normal fact witness.

 

Well that is why cases settle, you never know what you will get with a jury trial, so it makes more economic sense to lock in your risk.

 

The real issue is obviously juries, but how do you fix that problem? Its not just medical mal, its in every case where a jury is involved (civil and criminal). You get odd results, but the system was created to have that, so you cant just cap awards because juries are inconsistent, otherwise you are basically saying we cant trust juries, and if that is the case shouldnt it all just be bench trials? (And even then as Im sure you know, you will get a judge who makes an odd ruling.)

 

 

Thanks for all of the liberal spin, but in the rush to politicize it, you are missing the fact that this all adds to the cost of the system, which is the whole point. As earlier when you all were comparing total costs, to total costs, this all factors in. None of that is as a result of health insurance. Health insurance is a result of all of the costs. Until costs are dealt with, health insurance isn't going to get any cheaper.

 

I spent some time looking for the information you requested and provided it. The data is available in those links.

Edited July 5, 201213 yr by StrangeSox

There are 2 problems that haven't been touched upon in the discussion of malpractice here.

 

One of them is that there is an insurance company providing the malpractice coverage, and that insurance company can make decisions about the cost of its product that maintains their profitability, thus leading to increases in cost during downturns. You can actually see this in action in California, which requires medical malpractice insurers to open up their books to a state regulator and has repeatedly forced the medical malpractice insurers to refund money to medical providers that the government judged was overcharged. That's also one reason why instituting malpractice settlement caps has somewhere between a negligible and no impact on the cost a state pays for health care, or on the number of doctors in the state, or any other prediction one might make about what those caps would do.

 

The other issue...we actually have way too much malpractice in this health care system.

Health insurance is a result of all of the costs. Until costs are dealt with, health insurance isn't going to get any cheaper.

 

yea, and it's something they apparently will never address.

Edited July 5, 201213 yr by mr_genius

Our laboratories of democracy are trying to address it right now!

Our laboratories of democracy are trying to address it right now!

 

1) increase supply of doctors. flood the market by giving out green cards to anyone that can get a medical degree. establish a clear path by which a foreign-born, foreign-trained individual can receive a green card and a medical license. prices will sink like a stone.

Edited July 5, 201213 yr by mr_genius

The AMA's cap on residencies hasn't moved in about 15 years.

it's something they will never address.

Except for the multitude of ideas in the PPACA. I can't find the quote right now but I had one in 2010 of a health care economist saying that out of the 10 or so best ideas to reduce health insurance costs, 9 of them were included in some form in the PPACA, and the only one that wasn't was a public option.

1) increase supply of doctors. flood the market by giving out green cards to anyone that can get a medical degree. establish a clear path by which a foreign-born, foreign-trained individual can receive a green card and a medical license. prices will sink like a stone.

I'll add agreement on this part too.

The AMA's cap on residencies hasn't moved in about 15 years.

 

2) Remove the cap immediately.

I don't know that the government can mandate a private organization to do something like that. It's a guild cap, not a government cap.

I don't know that the government can mandate a private organization to do something like that. It's a guild cap, not a government cap.

 

Call it a tax.

Call it a tax.

 

^^^

thanks for explaining the joke guys.

It wont matter.

 

Tax them a 100%, theyll increase fees 100%.

 

Doctors have one of the most powerful and persuasive lobbies in all of America.

 

 

It wont matter.

 

Tax them a 100%, theyll increase fees 100%.

 

Doctors have one of the most powerful and persuasive lobbies in all of America.

 

the tax will triple each time they increase fees 1%.

 

but seriously, yea they have a really powerful lobby that is keeping price artificially high.

Edited July 5, 201213 yr by mr_genius

That is one consistent difference between US and other doctors--US doctors are compensated at much higher rates. I don't know if doctors in other countries have much lower medical school costs, though. I'd imagine some of them have terrible socialized school for their socialist doctors.

That is one consistent difference between US and other doctors--US doctors are compensated at much higher rates. I don't know if doctors in other countries have much lower medical school costs, though. I'd imagine some of them have terrible socialized school for their socialist doctors.

 

or just have more medical schools and increase the number of enrollments allowed. increase supply. but there is probably some lobby that would be against that so it won't happen.

Its just like lawyers, if they feel there are to many or the marketplace is getting saturated they increase the bar fail rate. What that doesnt solve is all of the terrible lawyers who already have licenses and get to charge jacked up prices.

 

 

I don't know that the government can mandate a private organization to do something like that. It's a guild cap, not a government cap.

 

Just tell them they will pay a penalty if they do not.

 

Its just like lawyers, if they feel there are to many or the marketplace is getting saturated they increase the bar fail rate. What that doesnt solve is all of the terrible lawyers who already have licenses and get to charge jacked up prices.

 

Really though, the legal profession is a good example of why an endless number of doctors wouldn't necessarily lower prices. You can have a million doctors with a degree, but there's still a finite number of jobs available for them. There are something like 5000 new attorneys in illinois a year and only a few hundred openings.

Edited July 5, 201213 yr by Jenksismybitch

But isnt that really the consumers fault? You can go get one of those new attorneys for a fraction of the price.

 

You dont need to work at a firm, it just makes the client feel safe and warm.

 

Some of the highest paid attorneys I have worked with have been by far the worst.

Really though, the legal profession is a good example of why an endless number of doctors wouldn't necessarily lower prices. You can have a million doctors with a degree, but there's still a finite number of jobs available for them.

 

Can't they open a private practice? In most circumstances the free market principles of supply and demand effects labor costs.

But isnt that really the consumers fault? You can go get one of those new attorneys for a fraction of the price.

 

You dont need to work at a firm, it just makes the client feel safe and warm.

 

Some of the highest paid attorneys I have worked with have been by far the worst.

 

 

I think the consumer is doing the right thing wanting someone with experience. I know I sure as hell wouldn't have hired me when I was right out of school. Shoot, my sister is trying to get me to represent her in a real estate closing. I'm scared to death of screwing it up since i've never done it before.