From: FatterDumber& Happier Moe on
Devil's_Advocate wrote:
> Straight from the New England Journal of Medicine:
>
> http://www.nejmjobs.org/rpt/physician-survey-health-reform-impact.aspx
>
> "Physician Survey: Health Reforms Potential Impact on Physician Supply and
> Quality of Medical Care
>
> Mar. � Apr. 2010
> Key Findings
>
> Physician Support of Health Reform in General
> � 62.7% of physicians feel that health reform is needed but should be
> implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to the sweeping
> overhaul that is in legislation.
>
> Health Reform and Primary Care Physicians
> � 46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal
> medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force them out
> of medicine or make them want to leave medicine."
> _____________________
>
> "Deem and pass" tactics unconstitutional! This tactic is being called the
> "unraveling of constitutional rule in the United States"!:
>
> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34508.html
>
> "�Slaughter Solution� could face legal challenge
> Tags:
>
> * Health Care Reform,
> * Supreme Court,
> * Nancy Pelosi,
> * Louise Slaughter
>
> * Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com Listen
> * Print
> * Comment
> * Email
> *
> * Subscribe
>
> By FRED BARBASH | 3/16/10 2:50 PM EDT
> Text Size
>
> * -
> * +
> * reset
>
> The deem and pass 'Slaughter Solution,' named for Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-
> N.Y.)., would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge, experts
> say.
> The 'Slaughter Solution' is named for Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.).
> Photo: AP
>
> Digg/Buzz It Up
>
> *
> * Digg this Story!
> * Buzz it up!
> * Add to LinkedIn
>
> POLITICO 44
>
> The so-called �Slaughter solution� for enacting health care reform without
> a conventional House vote on an identically worded Senate bill would be
> vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge, experts say.
>
> No lawyer interviewed by POLITICO thought the constitutionality of the
> �deem and pass� approach being considered by House Democrats was an open-
> and-shut case either way. But most agreed that it could raise
> constitutional issues sufficiently credible that the Supreme Court might
> get interested, as it has in the past.
>
> �If I were advising somebody," on whether deem and pass would run into
> constitutional trouble, "I would say to them, �Don�t do it,�� said Alan
> Morrison, a professor at the George Washington University Law School who
> has litigated similar issues before the Supreme Court on behalf of the
> watchdog organization Public Citizen. �What does �deem� mean? In class I
> always say it means �let's pretend.� 'Deems' means it's not true.�
>
> Any challenge likely would be based on two Supreme Court rulings, one in
> 1983 and the other in 1998, in which the court held that there is only one
> way to enact a law under the Constitution: it must be passed by both houses
> of Congress and signed by the president.
>
> In the more recent of the two rulings, a 1998 decision striking down the
> line-item veto, the court specifically said that the bills approved by both
> houses must contain the �the same text.� Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-N.Y.),
> for whom the procedure under consideration by House Democrats is now named,
> and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) filed amicus briefs arguing for the
> result the court reached in the line-item veto case.
>
> In the case of health care reform, the �Slaughter solution� would employ a
> �deem and pass� or �self-executing� procedure whereby the House would craft
> a rule deeming the Senate bill enacted, without a direct vote, for which
> members could pay a steep political price.
>
> The Senate bill and its text would not come before the House in the
> ordinary way for an up-or-down vote but would be passed indirectly. While
> this procedure has been used before, the Supreme Court has said in past
> cases that repetition of an unconstitutional process does not make it
> constitutional.
>
> �You run the risk that it could be declared unconstitutional. ... If both
> houses vote on the substance of everything, then I'm not troubled. But if
> it looks like the House is never going to vote on the Senate bill, that�s
> very troubling. I wouldn�t want to stake the entire bill on that,� said
> Morrison, who authored the brief challenging the line-item veto signed by
> Slaughter and Pelosi.
>
> "Any process that we follow will first be carefully vetted by the House
> Parliamentarian and consistent with the precedent and past practices of the
> House," said a spokesman for the Rules Committee.
>
> "And just as importantly, if we do pursue a plan where the rule includes
> self-executing language, it should not surprise Republicans - who
> themselves have eagerly used that process many times in the past."
>
> The constitutional questions about the process intensified Monday thanks to
> a Wall Street Journal op-ed by former U.S. appeals court judge Michael
> McConnell, now a professor at Stanford Law School and a senior fellow at
> the Hoover Institution.
>
> The �Slaughter solution,� he wrote, �may be clever, but it is not
> constitutional.�"... [rest of article]
>
>
>
>
If you made this kind of money with the present system you wouldn't
want it changed either, and these numbers are from 2003, add about
20-30% to these amounts.
* Brain/doctor:$450,00-$650,000
* Anesthesiology: $306,964
* Surgery, general: $255,438
* Obstetrics/gynecology: $233,061
* Psychiatry: $163,144
* Internal medicine: $155,530
* Pediatrics/adolescent medicine: $152,690
* Family practice (without obstetrics): $150,267
* ER doctors get paid 215,000+ a year (This is from the Medical
Group Management Association, Physician Compensation and Production
Report, 2003, as reprinted in the Department of Labor's career outlook
handbook.)
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_do_doctors_get_paid
And from
Another statistic to consider is an average college debt of $20,000 will
result in yearly mean incomes of $57,519/year whereas an average medical
student debt of $140,000 will result in yearly mean incomes of
$119,000-$299,000 per year.
http://www.medrounds.org/medical-news/2009/01/how-much-do-doctors-and-physicians-make.html
From: John Galt on
FatterDumber& Happier Moe wrote:
> Devil's_Advocate wrote:
>> Straight from the New England Journal of Medicine:
>>
>> http://www.nejmjobs.org/rpt/physician-survey-health-reform-impact.aspx
>>
>> "Physician Survey: Health Reforms Potential Impact on Physician Supply
>> and Quality of Medical Care
>>
>> Mar. � Apr. 2010
>> Key Findings
>>
>> Physician Support of Health Reform in General
>> � 62.7% of physicians feel that health reform is needed but should
>> be implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to the
>> sweeping overhaul that is in legislation.
>>
>> Health Reform and Primary Care Physicians
>> � 46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal
>> medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force
>> them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine."
>> _____________________
>>
>> "Deem and pass" tactics unconstitutional! This tactic is being called
>> the "unraveling of constitutional rule in the United States"!:
>>
>> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34508.html
>>
>> "�Slaughter Solution� could face legal challenge
>> Tags:
>>
>> * Health Care Reform,
>> * Supreme Court,
>> * Nancy Pelosi,
>> * Louise Slaughter
>>
>> * Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com Listen
>> * Print
>> * Comment
>> * Email
>> *
>> * Subscribe
>>
>> By FRED BARBASH | 3/16/10 2:50 PM EDT
>> Text Size
>>
>> * -
>> * +
>> * reset
>>
>> The deem and pass 'Slaughter Solution,' named for Rep. Louise
>> Slaughter (D-
>> N.Y.)., would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge,
>> experts say.
>> The 'Slaughter Solution' is named for Rep. Louise Slaughter
>> (D-N.Y.). Photo: AP
>> Digg/Buzz It Up
>>
>> *
>> * Digg this Story!
>> * Buzz it up!
>> * Add to LinkedIn
>>
>> POLITICO 44
>>
>> The so-called �Slaughter solution� for enacting health care reform
>> without a conventional House vote on an identically worded Senate bill
>> would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge, experts say.
>>
>> No lawyer interviewed by POLITICO thought the constitutionality of the
>> �deem and pass� approach being considered by House Democrats was an open-
>> and-shut case either way. But most agreed that it could raise
>> constitutional issues sufficiently credible that the Supreme Court
>> might get interested, as it has in the past.
>>
>> �If I were advising somebody," on whether deem and pass would run into
>> constitutional trouble, "I would say to them, �Don�t do it,�� said
>> Alan Morrison, a professor at the George Washington University Law
>> School who has litigated similar issues before the Supreme Court on
>> behalf of the watchdog organization Public Citizen. �What does �deem�
>> mean? In class I always say it means �let's pretend.� 'Deems' means
>> it's not true.�
>>
>> Any challenge likely would be based on two Supreme Court rulings, one
>> in 1983 and the other in 1998, in which the court held that there is
>> only one way to enact a law under the Constitution: it must be passed
>> by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
>>
>> In the more recent of the two rulings, a 1998 decision striking down
>> the line-item veto, the court specifically said that the bills
>> approved by both houses must contain the �the same text.� Rep. Louise
>> Slaughter (D-N.Y.), for whom the procedure under consideration by
>> House Democrats is now named, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
>> filed amicus briefs arguing for the result the court reached in the
>> line-item veto case.
>>
>> In the case of health care reform, the �Slaughter solution� would
>> employ a �deem and pass� or �self-executing� procedure whereby the
>> House would craft a rule deeming the Senate bill enacted, without a
>> direct vote, for which members could pay a steep political price.
>>
>> The Senate bill and its text would not come before the House in the
>> ordinary way for an up-or-down vote but would be passed indirectly.
>> While this procedure has been used before, the Supreme Court has said
>> in past cases that repetition of an unconstitutional process does not
>> make it constitutional.
>>
>> �You run the risk that it could be declared unconstitutional. ... If
>> both houses vote on the substance of everything, then I'm not
>> troubled. But if it looks like the House is never going to vote on the
>> Senate bill, that�s very troubling. I wouldn�t want to stake the
>> entire bill on that,� said Morrison, who authored the brief
>> challenging the line-item veto signed by Slaughter and Pelosi.
>>
>> "Any process that we follow will first be carefully vetted by the
>> House Parliamentarian and consistent with the precedent and past
>> practices of the House," said a spokesman for the Rules Committee.
>>
>> "And just as importantly, if we do pursue a plan where the rule
>> includes self-executing language, it should not surprise Republicans -
>> who themselves have eagerly used that process many times in the past."
>>
>> The constitutional questions about the process intensified Monday
>> thanks to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by former U.S. appeals court
>> judge Michael McConnell, now a professor at Stanford Law School and a
>> senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
>>
>> The �Slaughter solution,� he wrote, �may be clever, but it is not
>> constitutional.�"... [rest of article]
>>
>>
>>
>>
> If you made this kind of money with the present system you wouldn't
> want it changed either, and these numbers are from 2003, add about
> 20-30% to these amounts.
> * Brain/doctor:$450,00-$650,000
> * Anesthesiology: $306,964
> * Surgery, general: $255,438
> * Obstetrics/gynecology: $233,061
> * Psychiatry: $163,144
> * Internal medicine: $155,530
> * Pediatrics/adolescent medicine: $152,690
> * Family practice (without obstetrics): $150,267
> * ER doctors get paid 215,000+ a year (This is from the Medical
> Group Management Association, Physician Compensation and Production
> Report, 2003, as reprinted in the Department of Labor's career outlook
> handbook.)
> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_do_doctors_get_paid
> And from
> Another statistic to consider is an average college debt of $20,000 will
> result in yearly mean incomes of $57,519/year whereas an average medical
> student debt of $140,000 will result in yearly mean incomes of
> $119,000-$299,000 per year.
> http://www.medrounds.org/medical-news/2009/01/how-much-do-doctors-and-physicians-make.html

You need to factor in the malpractice insurance and other overhead costs
of running your own practice into those numbers for them to make any
sense. An MD making $150K isn't taking home anywhere's near what a
salesman making $150K is.

JG

From: FatterDumber& Happier Moe on
John Galt wrote:
> FatterDumber& Happier Moe wrote:
>> Devil's_Advocate wrote:
>>> Straight from the New England Journal of Medicine:
>>>
>>> http://www.nejmjobs.org/rpt/physician-survey-health-reform-impact.aspx
>>>
>>> "Physician Survey: Health Reforms Potential Impact on Physician
>>> Supply and Quality of Medical Care
>>>
>>> Mar. � Apr. 2010
>>> Key Findings
>>>
>>> Physician Support of Health Reform in General
>>> � 62.7% of physicians feel that health reform is needed but
>>> should be implemented in a more targeted, gradual way, as opposed to
>>> the sweeping overhaul that is in legislation.
>>>
>>> Health Reform and Primary Care Physicians
>>> � 46.3% of primary care physicians (family medicine and internal
>>> medicine) feel that the passing of health reform will either force
>>> them out of medicine or make them want to leave medicine."
>>> _____________________
>>>
>>> "Deem and pass" tactics unconstitutional! This tactic is being called
>>> the "unraveling of constitutional rule in the United States"!:
>>>
>>> http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0310/34508.html
>>>
>>> "�Slaughter Solution� could face legal challenge
>>> Tags:
>>>
>>> * Health Care Reform,
>>> * Supreme Court,
>>> * Nancy Pelosi,
>>> * Louise Slaughter
>>>
>>> * Listen to this article. Powered by Odiogo.com Listen
>>> * Print
>>> * Comment
>>> * Email
>>> *
>>> * Subscribe
>>>
>>> By FRED BARBASH | 3/16/10 2:50 PM EDT
>>> Text Size
>>>
>>> * -
>>> * +
>>> * reset
>>>
>>> The deem and pass 'Slaughter Solution,' named for Rep. Louise
>>> Slaughter (D-
>>> N.Y.)., would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge,
>>> experts say.
>>> The 'Slaughter Solution' is named for Rep. Louise Slaughter
>>> (D-N.Y.). Photo: AP
>>> Digg/Buzz It Up
>>>
>>> *
>>> * Digg this Story!
>>> * Buzz it up!
>>> * Add to LinkedIn
>>>
>>> POLITICO 44
>>>
>>> The so-called �Slaughter solution� for enacting health care reform
>>> without a conventional House vote on an identically worded Senate
>>> bill would be vulnerable to credible constitutional challenge,
>>> experts say.
>>>
>>> No lawyer interviewed by POLITICO thought the constitutionality of
>>> the �deem and pass� approach being considered by House Democrats was
>>> an open-
>>> and-shut case either way. But most agreed that it could raise
>>> constitutional issues sufficiently credible that the Supreme Court
>>> might get interested, as it has in the past.
>>>
>>> �If I were advising somebody," on whether deem and pass would run
>>> into constitutional trouble, "I would say to them, �Don�t do it,��
>>> said Alan Morrison, a professor at the George Washington University
>>> Law School who has litigated similar issues before the Supreme Court
>>> on behalf of the watchdog organization Public Citizen. �What does
>>> �deem� mean? In class I always say it means �let's pretend.� 'Deems'
>>> means it's not true.�
>>>
>>> Any challenge likely would be based on two Supreme Court rulings, one
>>> in 1983 and the other in 1998, in which the court held that there is
>>> only one way to enact a law under the Constitution: it must be passed
>>> by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
>>>
>>> In the more recent of the two rulings, a 1998 decision striking down
>>> the line-item veto, the court specifically said that the bills
>>> approved by both houses must contain the �the same text.� Rep. Louise
>>> Slaughter (D-N.Y.), for whom the procedure under consideration by
>>> House Democrats is now named, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
>>> filed amicus briefs arguing for the result the court reached in the
>>> line-item veto case.
>>>
>>> In the case of health care reform, the �Slaughter solution� would
>>> employ a �deem and pass� or �self-executing� procedure whereby the
>>> House would craft a rule deeming the Senate bill enacted, without a
>>> direct vote, for which members could pay a steep political price.
>>>
>>> The Senate bill and its text would not come before the House in the
>>> ordinary way for an up-or-down vote but would be passed indirectly.
>>> While this procedure has been used before, the Supreme Court has said
>>> in past cases that repetition of an unconstitutional process does not
>>> make it constitutional.
>>>
>>> �You run the risk that it could be declared unconstitutional. ... If
>>> both houses vote on the substance of everything, then I'm not
>>> troubled. But if it looks like the House is never going to vote on
>>> the Senate bill, that�s very troubling. I wouldn�t want to stake the
>>> entire bill on that,� said Morrison, who authored the brief
>>> challenging the line-item veto signed by Slaughter and Pelosi.
>>>
>>> "Any process that we follow will first be carefully vetted by the
>>> House Parliamentarian and consistent with the precedent and past
>>> practices of the House," said a spokesman for the Rules Committee.
>>>
>>> "And just as importantly, if we do pursue a plan where the rule
>>> includes self-executing language, it should not surprise Republicans
>>> - who themselves have eagerly used that process many times in the past."
>>>
>>> The constitutional questions about the process intensified Monday
>>> thanks to a Wall Street Journal op-ed by former U.S. appeals court
>>> judge Michael McConnell, now a professor at Stanford Law School and a
>>> senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
>>>
>>> The �Slaughter solution,� he wrote, �may be clever, but it is not
>>> constitutional.�"... [rest of article]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> If you made this kind of money with the present system you wouldn't
>> want it changed either, and these numbers are from 2003, add about
>> 20-30% to these amounts.
>> * Brain/doctor:$450,00-$650,000
>> * Anesthesiology: $306,964
>> * Surgery, general: $255,438
>> * Obstetrics/gynecology: $233,061
>> * Psychiatry: $163,144
>> * Internal medicine: $155,530
>> * Pediatrics/adolescent medicine: $152,690
>> * Family practice (without obstetrics): $150,267
>> * ER doctors get paid 215,000+ a year (This is from the Medical
>> Group Management Association, Physician Compensation and Production
>> Report, 2003, as reprinted in the Department of Labor's career outlook
>> handbook.)
>> http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_do_doctors_get_paid
>> And from
>> Another statistic to consider is an average college debt of $20,000
>> will result in yearly mean incomes of $57,519/year whereas an average
>> medical student debt of $140,000 will result in yearly mean incomes of
>> $119,000-$299,000 per year.
>> http://www.medrounds.org/medical-news/2009/01/how-much-do-doctors-and-physicians-make.html
>
>
> You need to factor in the malpractice insurance and other overhead costs
> of running your own practice into those numbers for them to make any
> sense. An MD making $150K isn't taking home anywhere's near what a
> salesman making $150K is.
>
> JG
>

All I need to factor in is the houses and land I've seen the doctors
buy and live in. It's very obvious most, and we are talking 95%, of the
doctors make an exceptionally good living.
From: John Galt on
Devil's_Advocate wrote:
> FatterDumber& Happier Moe <"WheresMyCheck"@UncleSamLoves.Mee> wrote :
>
>> If you made this kind of money with the present system you wouldn't
>> want it changed either, and these numbers are from 2003, add about
>> 20-30% to these amounts.
>> * Brain/doctor:$450,00-$650,000
>> * Anesthesiology: $306,964
>> * Surgery, general: $255,438
>> * Obstetrics/gynecology: $233,061
>> * Psychiatry: $163,144
>> * Internal medicine: $155,530
>> * Pediatrics/adolescent medicine: $152,690
>> * Family practice (without obstetrics): $150,267
>> * ER doctors get paid 215,000+ a year (This is from the Medical
>
> Oh NO! The doctors and hospitals MAKE MONEY! Revolt comrades!
>
> Everyone ( even the doctors! ) should be paid $5 an hour for "socialist
> justice"!
>
> We cant have anyone <shudder> MAKING A PROFIT or a GOOD LIVING for the 8 or
> more years they spent in medical school! Horrors!
>
> Of course if the comrades get there way, who would want to be a doctor?
> ( as evidenced by that survey! )
>
> You should go read a book called "We The Living". It would illustrate what
> happens when all incentives are removed from a society by marxists.

We saw what happens when you do that in the USSR.

Suffice to say that one would want to invest all their money in
companies that make vodka.

JG

>
From: John Galt on
Devil's_Advocate wrote:
> John Galt <kady101(a)gmail.com> wrote :
>
>
>> We saw what happens when you do that in the USSR.
>>
>> Suffice to say that one would want to invest all their money in
>> companies that make vodka.
>
> You'll notice the growing pot legalization movement here ( not that I'm
> against it - it's freedom ). They'll need people doped up to handle what
> they're trying to "radically transform" America into.

Interesting thought.

JG

>
> "Elect progressive candidates for every office - for jobs, security,
> democracy, and peace, vote Communist!" - "Progress and Democracy for Rhode
> Island.", 1938
>
> "I don�t want to punish anybody but there are an extraordinary amount of
> people whom I want to kill. I think it would be a good thing to make
> everybody come before a properly appointed board and say every five or
> every seven years, just put them there and say "Sir or Madam, will you be
> kind enough to justify your existence?� If you�re not producing as much as
> you consume or perhaps a little more then clearly we cannot use this big
> organization of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive because
> your life does not benefit us and it can�t be of very much use to
> yourself."" - George Bernard Shaw, 20th Century Progressive icon
>
> "I prefer the word progressive, which has a real American meaning, going
> back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th Century. I
> consider myself a modern progressive." - HILLARY CLINTON, JULY 23, 2007
>
>
>