• nanometer1625@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    15 hours ago

    The rate at which new doctors are trained in the USA has historically been bottlenecked by the number of residency program slots available. Hospitals financially benefit from each resident they employ, but not as much as they do from adding other roles, instead (such as nurses). Also, it is not trivial to create a new residency program or expand an existing one (accreditation requirements, other fixed costs, etc.). This is why 25 % of USA physicians are immigrants. The Republicans have also made it more expensive to get loans for medical school, which will discourage some people from going to med school in the future, although the insufficient supply of residency slots might still end up being the bottleneck.

    But even if we did not increase the supply of doctors, moving to Single Payer would still benefit us by reducing cost. I don’t think Single Payer would need to be coupled to increasing the supply of physicians.

    • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      nurses are making bank, they deserve it. when 2 billionaires made it free for the current students, i think columbia and one other. the schools selectively excluded less well off/wealthy students(people that can stay home all day and study) from medical school from being accepted, so it isnt an easy fix, because med school is not something you can have a job and still study, thats why most tend to be wealthy MDs or well off.

      alot of the MDs in our area are asian, ME, or indians, and whites. the 4 well off demographics, black and latin ones are rare, others like indigineous are almost non-existent.

      this is very similar to 2 other health programs i looked at radiology technologist, and CLS. both ahve decent high income but very small bottlenecked amount of schools that teach it. Community colleges, while very cheap have horrendous acceptance, and wait times, many years(4 years sometimes), many students find it not worth it and just get a degree instead, because they only ever accept 20-30 per semester or per year out of 20k people waiting for any number CC that teach it(lucikly is not by competition, but by a lottery system).

      CLS has a same problem but reversed, low number of schools that each it, and even lower for the adjacent MLT program(that can be used to bridge the gap for a CLS program), plus everyone is trying to come to the west coast for the schools(only 9 schools in the west teach it, imagining hundreds and thousands trying to get into the program at any given semester). this ensures the salaries remain high i guess, by limiting how people and how much schools are teaching it. CLS significantly more competitive than Radio techs(because it requires alot of 4 year university classes. CLS is appealing because it is a very cheap grad program(less than 20k for the whole year), compared to something like pharmacy from a nearby university which is more than 10X the cost and 3-4times as long, but thier starting salary is very similar.

      radio tech people can choose to go to a university, which has expideted acceptance, but way more expensive, also similar income levels. oh and there are shortages of cls and radio techs in general, but im guessing its on purpose so they dont lower the salaries.

    • MortUS@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Damn, it’s a more multi-faceted issue than I had guessed. The U.S. sure has a long uphill battle ahead…

      • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        They have been purposely fucking shit up for a long time. They just keep layering more shit on so there’s never a chance of any real progress.