Friedman On Curing Healthcare: No Licensure Of Physicians?

[Lightfiend]

Friedman On Curing Healthcare: No Licensure Of Physicians?

Milton Friedman discusses the American Medical Association. According to him, the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition within the industry, leading to lower quality services as well as limited availability to the American public. Although I don’t yet fully accept Friedman’s suggestion, I still find it an interesting proposition that is worth spreading, check it out.

 

[Emma]

Physicians are licensed by the state, not the AMA.

 

[The Rabbi]

Physicians are licensed by the state, not the AMA.

Irrelevant.
Licensing of businesses generally serve to protect those businesses from competition, not the consumer, which is the claim.

 

[Emma]

Physicians are licensed by the state, not the AMA.

Irrelevant.
Licensing of businesses generally serve to protect those businesses from competition, not the consumer, which is the claim.

How is it irrelevant when that is the crux of his argument?

According to him, the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition within the industry, leading to lower quality services as well as limited availability to the American public.

 

[The Rabbi]

It is irrelevant because that isnt the argument.
The argument is that licensing of physicians reduces competition and thus increases costs. The AMA controls the supply by controlling the number of places in med schools. But that is still not central to the argument.

 

[Emma]

It is irrelevant because that isnt the argument.
The argument is that licensing of physicians reduces competition and thus increases costs. The AMA controls the supply by controlling the number of places in med schools. But that is still not central to the argument.

What part of "the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition" do you not get?

 

[The Rabbi]

It is irrelevant because that isnt the argument.
The argument is that licensing of physicians reduces competition and thus increases costs. The AMA controls the supply by controlling the number of places in med schools. But that is still not central to the argument.

What part of "the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition" do you not get?

What part of "licensing of physicians reduces competition and increases costs" do YOU not get?
And that was the argument.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

It is irrelevant because that isnt the argument.
The argument is that licensing of physicians reduces competition and thus increases costs. The AMA controls the supply by controlling the number of places in med schools. But that is still not central to the argument.

What part of "the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition" do you not get?

See my thumb?



Gee they're dumb!

 

[Emma]

Explain how doing away with physician licensure would increase competition.

 

[The Rabbi]

Is that a serious question??

 

[Emma]

Is that a serious question??

Yep.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, do you think that some arbitrary exam has people who fail as well as people who pass?

Do you think the people who failed then go on to practice medicine?

Do you think the very existence of a difficult exam serves to discourage some people from even taking it?

 

[KittenKoder]

Friedman On Curing Healthcare: No Licensure Of Physicians?

Milton Friedman discusses the American Medical Association. According to him, the AMA’s monopoly on the licensure of physicians in the United States has put a damper on competition within the industry, leading to lower quality services as well as limited availability to the American public. Although I don’t yet fully accept Friedman’s suggestion, I still find it an interesting proposition that is worth spreading, check it out.

Oh no! We can't possibly expect people to start checking on their own doctor's creds ... no way, se need a babysitter to keep telling us what's "safe" (even though it always seems to kill us anyway) and "good" ('nuff said there).

 

[Emma]

Well, do you think that some arbitrary exam has people who fail as well as people who pass?

Do you think the people who failed then go on to practice medicine?

Do you think the very existence of a difficult exam serves to discourage some people from even taking it?

You're not answering the question

 

[The Rabbi]

yeah actually I am.
To spell it out, the existence of an exam like that serves in the first place to discourage possibly qualiifed people from taking it. Second people who might be qualified could fail. All of this reduces the number of licensed physicians, reducing competition.

See how easy that was?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Irrelevant.
Licensing of businesses generally serve to protect those businesses from competition, not the consumer, which is the claim.

I am a CPA licensed by the state.. my licensing has absolutely NOTHING to do with protecting me from competition.. or consumers, whatever that means. It has to do with ensuring that I meet requirments for public practice. I doubt licensing a doctor is any different. Friedman once again is off his rocker.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Second people who might be qualified could fail.

How does a qualified person fail the exam? If you can't pass the exam, you're obviously not qualified since passage of the exam is what qualifies you.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Dow away with med school too then.

 

[The Rabbi]

Irrelevant.
Licensing of businesses generally serve to protect those businesses from competition, not the consumer, which is the claim.

I am a CPA licensed by the state.. my licensing has absolutely NOTHING to do with protecting me from competition.. or consumers, whatever that means. It has to do with ensuring that I meet requirments for public practice. I doubt licensing a doctor is any different. Friedman once again is off his rocker.

Actually it does. Although not everyone has to use a CPA for preparing accounts. But everyone has to use a licensed physician in order for insurance to pay.

The main issue is that there are a huge number of foreign trained doctors who could be practicing here but dont, largely because of the licensing issue. In fact, I know some Xrays are read by Australians and Singaporeans with the results merely confirmed by a US licensed physician.
We will see more of this "outsourcing" of physicians as time goes by.

 

[Emma]

yeah actually I am.
To spell it out, the existence of an exam like that serves in the first place to discourage possibly qualiifed people from taking it. Second people who might be qualified could fail.

How is it determined who is "qualified" to practice as a physician? Who determines who's qualified?