what would happen if all Doctors, lawyers, and other top paid professions...

originally posted by: Tardacus
I have a better question: what would happen if doctors and lawyers and some other professions only got paid when they actually did their job and succeeded?

lawyers get paid whether they win the case or lose it, doctors get paid whether the patient lives or dies, weather men get paid whether they guess the forecast for next day or are totally wrong.

Lawyers get paid for their time and their skill. For every case that a lawyer "wins", there is a lawyer on the other side that "loses". Many cases settle somewhere in the middle - is that a win or a loss? If I only got paid for cases that I "win" I would not take borderline cases, or cases that just aren't clear what happened. What would people do in that circumstance, when they need a lawyer to help sort things but couldn't hire one because their case isn't a "winner"? Unscrupulous people would know that they could muddle up transactions because no lawyer would represent the other guy in a non "winning" case.

More to the point: When your kid is handcuffed to the radiator of the police station at 51st and Wentworth at 2 a.m. for trying to buy crack on the south side, your kid doesn't need "winning" he just needs someone to help bail him out, get him through the arraignment. If your kid is obviously guilty, who is going to protect him from the overreaching State's Attorney who wants to charge him with dealing drugs?

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: one4all

Googled heart atta......

Damn! Doesn't work if you're unconscious.


Me: Siri! I just cut off my hand!

Siri: "I've found these locations for Honey Baked Ham".

Lets not overcomplicate things......there are 100,000,000 willing able candidates in each of India and China......who can be trained to be doctors in 1/2 the time we currently spend teaching and "certifying" doctors....dump the Insurance companies which are TPTB fiat money laundering entities......and you dump the "certifications" and you dump the un-needed uber-controlled extended education process......and we have 200,000,000 doctors flooding the world in no time.

Lawyers???....lol.....are you kidding me....lol....a search engine can reference and parse MILLION and MILLIONS of casefiles in a flash......who needs a guy or gal with an above average memory now when it gives zero edge or advantage......lol....nobody.......old advantages no longer apply.

I have met some really incompetent stupid doctors.....since the internet came out many have been exposed as morons......any fool can acess the Harvard Medical Diagnostic related textbooks or any other "standard" diagnostic textbooks and simply follow the step by step SIMPLE SIMON directions.....but but but.....MANY doctors do not do this.....if YOU follow these steps as outlined in the same books the idiots use to get their degrees you WILL find your own correct diagnostic results MORE TIMES than many of them do with less peripheral laboratory based testing done to your body[money making cash-cows for the industry].......but you will have a difficult time acessing the diagnostic testing required to follow up as per SOP diagnostic prodedure......only your "doctor" can order these tests....or prescribe treatments or medications.

Doctors and Lawyers are controlled by the Boards and Businesses which Certify and Insure them......TPTB controls them completely and both Doctors and Lawyers are critical feedlines which keep TPTB money warehouses working overtime.

originally posted by: one4all

Lawyers???....lol.....are you kidding me....lol....a search engine can reference and parse MILLION and MILLIONS of casefiles in a flash......who needs a guy or gal with an above average memory now when it gives zero edge or advantage......lol....nobody.......old advantages no longer apply.

That isn't what you pay a lawyer for. Or a doctor.

It's a bit insulting to both professions that you think it boils down a glorified memory trick.

Caselaw is a tool, just like a hammer is to a carpenter. Do you think that having a toolbox full of hammers is enough to make you a carpenter?

originally posted by: LanceCorvette

originally posted by: Tardacus
I have a better question: what would happen if doctors and lawyers and some other professions only got paid when they actually did their job and succeeded?

lawyers get paid whether they win the case or lose it, doctors get paid whether the patient lives or dies, weather men get paid whether they guess the forecast for next day or are totally wrong.

Lawyers get paid for their time and their skill. For every case that a lawyer "wins", there is a lawyer on the other side that "loses". Many cases settle somewhere in the middle - is that a win or a loss? If I only got paid for cases that I "win" I would not take borderline cases, or cases that just aren't clear what happened. What would people do in that circumstance, when they need a lawyer to help sort things but couldn't hire one because their case isn't a "winner"? Unscrupulous people would know that they could muddle up transactions because no lawyer would represent the other guy in a non "winning" case.

More to the point: When your kid is handcuffed to the radiator of the police station at 51st and Wentworth at 2 a.m. for trying to buy crack on the south side, your kid doesn't need "winning" he just needs someone to help bail him out, get him through the arraignment. If your kid is obviously guilty, who is going to protect him from the overreaching State's Attorney who wants to charge him with dealing drugs?

This is where the system would need to change. At least hypothetically.

The prosecution would be operating under the same payment plan so that means they wouldn't get paid either unless they had a winning case.

So now that we have the rules of engagement nailed down... let's look at how the system would work.

A person is accused of a crime. The police officer making the arrest is friends with a prosecuting attorney and has been hearing about how this attorney isn't doing so well because the cases he gets are arbitrarily assigned and the cases aren't paying. He can't make ends meet.

The officer knows that the individual he's arresting has been in trouble before for drug dealing. Down in evidence there's some confiscated drugs so he decides to help his friend by planting evidence which is undoubtedly going to tip the scales in his friend's favor, assuming that his friend gets the case.

The case gets to trial but another prosecuting attorney is assigned and "wins" the case based on evidence.

Of course this could play either way, but should illustrate how a system like that simply wouldn't work.

If you're not winning cases, how do you eat? How do you support your family? This profession would become more akin to a sales position where commissions are earned... i don't think this would be a good idea.

The system we have isn't perfect but lets not make it worse.

The same goes for any other profession such as medical etc. Corruption would rule the day more than it already does.

I get that. However, there are also those in your community who have the misfortune of requiring specialists for very complicated conditions. Unless they are pensioners still covered by the vestiges of long retired industries, I am guessing you are aware of some in your community yourself.

a reply to: worldstarcountry

That is the reason for my suggestion of catastrophic insurance coverage. I'm well aware of complicated conditions and the need for help in that situation but the current laws say that I, at 63 years of age have to purchase maternity coverage despite the fact that I've been physically unable to bear a child since I was 27 years old. Prior to Obamacare, I could purchase a catastrophic coverage policy with a high deductible. In over 40 years of carrying health insurance, there were only three years that I met the deductible, one was the year I gave birth, one was the year I had a hysterectomy and one was for cataract surgeries. Interestingly enough, the hysterectomy and the cataract surgeries were necessary due to the treatment my mother had received while I was in the womb!

Also, having been in the medical-industrial complex, I know that people with insurance get far more revenue-producing tests and procedures than those who are footing the bills individually. Many hospitals and clinics have such revenue-producing procedures as part of their "protocol" and use "It is part of our protocol to rule out..." as an excuse to collect more revenue. The idea of "do no harm" got lost in shuffle for more money.

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: one4all

Lawyers???....lol.....are you kidding me....lol....a search engine can reference and parse MILLION and MILLIONS of casefiles in a flash......who needs a guy or gal with an above average memory now when it gives zero edge or advantage......lol....nobody.......old advantages no longer apply.

That isn't what you pay a lawyer for. Or a doctor.

It's a bit insulting to both professions that you think it boils down a glorified memory trick.

Caselaw is a tool, just like a hammer is to a carpenter. Do you think that having a toolbox full of hammers is enough to make you a carpenter?

It is not insulting it is reality.....and what you pay doctors and lawyers to do is FACILLITATE EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION on your behalf...to walk the contextual minefield of person-to-person communication dynamics....that is all you pay for.........and it is the only difference between a search engine and an olde tyme doctor or lawyer....except for one epic sized mitigating factor....LMAO......YOU input your own verbology into a search engine and YOU follow up....so there is LESS room for miscommunication and error than if it were a Dr. asking you the questions he or she needed to ask to get into their own personal comfort zones.

Caselaw is window dressing hiding the ugly reality of Law....everything is a negotiation...absolutely everything....caselaw is a generic guide which helps select dynamic from which everything will stem forward......but the mere existance of precedents by proxy renders caselaw into an excusatory history book....lol.

Law is an excercise in verbology.....and this is essentially describing trickery........all a lawyer does is become a conduit between the layman and the lawman.

Medicine is an excercise in verbology vis avis diagonostic contextuality and categorical usage....all a doctor does is become a conduit between the patients interpretations of their symptoology and its origins and the true diagnostic spectrum of causality which is oftentimes much larger in scope than the patients possible vision allows for.The Dr. has to figure out what you mean when you say "it hurts here" and then they need to look on both sides of that dynamic for evidence of causality which could reveal re-directs of symptomatics.....however this is the easy part....the only difficult thing is figuring out what the heck the patient is trying to point out to you and relate it to the basic physiology/biology of the body to build a starting point for their symptomatic spectral investigation .

A toolbox full of hammers is all I need to make an equal number of carpenters...but 1000 carpenters couldnt build a thing without hammers.....everything in life is monkey see monkey do....lol...of course if you lack tools and knowledge you must use trial and error to move forward....but this is why online data in search engine/video format has made so many jobs like Drs and Lawyers worth less.....anyone can learn online for free now...no more exclusivity connected to fiscal social standing or opportunity.....12 year old kids in India are in their 2nd year of medicine...yes the EXACT same courses YOUR DR took.....lol......and lets get real .....if you watch a video on building a birdhouse and you break it down into steps....lol...you will discover an inguinal hernia surgery has fewer steps than building a Kids Birdhouse Kit does......and really anyone who can build a kids Model Kit has steady enough hands to do generic surgery under emergency conditions.......of course it takes YEARS of combined knowledge and acumen to do the operation fewer or not BUT BUT BUT someone watching the video DOES NOT NEED that knowlefge or acumen database....just good eyes ears hand eye co-ordination and a firm disposition or a firm motivator like a life and death situation.

No I do not believe Drs and Lawyers are worth a penny more than mothers or electricians or firemen......not a red cent more.

a reply to: LanceCorvette

...And that is exactly why a lot of lawyers won't take a case unless it seems like it's airtight from the get go...

And why you probably can't afford a good lawyer, as crappy lawyers still charge an arm and a leg because whether you win or lose they get paid.

The system is corrupt to it's core.

originally posted by: KawRider9
a reply to: luciferslight

You do know the government gets its money from the "public" right?

So your proposal is, we the people, pay the government, to pay the doctors, to give is free care? #ing brilliant!

You forgot a few steps:

1. We the people pay the government

2. The government pays the bureaucrats who write the regulations

3. That governs the bureaucrats who control and distribute the doctors (we pay them too)

4. And we pay the bureaucrats who cut the checks for themselves, the other bureaucrats, and the doctors

5. And we pay the doctors

6. But we don't directly pay for our care at the office

originally posted by: rickymouse
Why should our tax dollars pay very high salaries to these people. A lot of the doctors make millions a year. A lot of lawyers make multimillions a year. The only way that would work is if they limited the salaries of these people to a reasonable rate which would be based off of their experience. Their college could be paid and their salary starting at say seventy five grand a year then rising up to maybe a hundred and thirty to fifty grand a year based on their specialty and bonuses for fixing people quicker.

If we pay for their college now too?

So we're paying for their college and paying them for life out of our taxes?!

And if we do that for their essential services, what will be the next profession that argues that they are essential and needs that sweet deal?

Also, you understand that our government is composed almost entirely of lawyers, right? So now, they will have their entire professional lives paid for, cradle to grave by the taxpayers while writing laws to screw us over even worse?

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: KawRider9
a reply to: luciferslight

You do know the government gets its money from the "public" right?

So your proposal is, we the people, pay the government, to pay the doctors, to give is free care? #ing brilliant!

You forgot a few steps:

1. We the people pay the government

2. The government pays the bureaucrats who write the regulations

3. That governs the bureaucrats who control and distribute the doctors (we pay them too)

4. And we pay the bureaucrats who cut the checks for themselves, the other bureaucrats, and the doctors

5. And we pay the doctors

6. But we don't directly pay for our care at the office

So we're paying the doctors several times....

Why can't the doctors and medical professionals be paid for through the taxes we already pay instead of having to pay over and over?

I think the problem here isn't "where is the money going to come from"... it's "how will the medical industry continue to profit"

As it stands the sick and dying are commodities... they need us sick and dying in order to profit. Heapthy people don't line the pockets of the medical industry.

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: rickymouse
Why should our tax dollars pay very high salaries to these people. A lot of the doctors make millions a year. A lot of lawyers make multimillions a year. The only way that would work is if they limited the salaries of these people to a reasonable rate which would be based off of their experience. Their college could be paid and their salary starting at say seventy five grand a year then rising up to maybe a hundred and thirty to fifty grand a year based on their specialty and bonuses for fixing people quicker.

If we pay for their college now too?

So we're paying for their college and paying them for life out of our taxes?!

And if we do that for their essential services, what will be the next profession that argues that they are essential and needs that sweet deal?

Also, you understand that our government is composed almost entirely of lawyers, right? So now, they will have their entire professional lives paid for, cradle to grave by the taxpayers while writing laws to screw us over even worse?

The problem with our government is everyone has legal degrees. Laws are written to control us, they have exclusions that seem to protect some people. The rich and famous have lawyers that get them out of things through these loopholes written into laws...by lawyers.

originally posted by: one4all

...everything is a negotiation...

This is closer to being the truth than your nonsense about being a walking legal encyclopedia.

I've just got back home from doing a bit of old fashioned lawyerin'. 0% caselaw, 1% law, 77% having the knowledge and skills to take a scalpel to the situation, 22% having the experience to know in which of the freshly-exposed cracks to stick the crowbar and apply leverage.

Negotiators would be a very fine term indeed. You can't learn that from google. Believe me, I've sat in courts and watched plenty of lay people try. The ones who succeed tend to already have the mindset that you need, they just lack the formal training.

originally posted by: EvillerBob

originally posted by: one4all

...everything is a negotiation...

This is closer to being the truth than your nonsense about being a walking legal encyclopedia.

I've just got back home from doing a bit of old fashioned lawyerin'. 0% caselaw, 1% law, 77% having the knowledge and skills to take a scalpel to the situation, 22% having the experience to know in which of the freshly-exposed cracks to stick the crowbar and apply leverage.

Tis not nonsense...the litle Billys and Bettys who had a birthgiven memory advantage found themselves inside a comfort zone academiclly.....hence rose through the system with more sucess and generally quicker....because this is how the sysem was designed to funnel them.

Just like those athleticlly inclined did better in Gym class.

Those "freshly exposed" dynamic swingpoints or...... keystone waypoints[you may borrow the term...lol]....you were looking for are the effecs and impacts of your ACUMEN which was built primarily upon you memory and from a secondary standpoint from your insitu experiences.....IMHO the tertiary level impact is your own personal life experiences external to you trade.

IMHO lawyers/lawyers with fully a expanded life experiences perform better because they can connect better to a higher volume of perspectives effectively....because.....lol.....its all about communiction.......LMAO...criminals should be calling lawyers for their free 30 minute consults BEFORE they do the crimes....lol.....dimes to dollars says 90% of the crimes will be downgraded on the phone before the worst ones happen....lol.....the systems are built to be gamed...with back-doors and firewalls.




Negotiators would be a very fine term indeed. You can't learn that from google. Believe me, I've sat in courts and watched plenty of lay people try. The ones who succeed tend to already have the mindset that you need, they just lack the formal training.

originally posted by: one4all
Tis not nonsense...the litle Billys and Bettys who had a birthgiven memory advantage found themselves inside a comfort zone academiclly.....hence rose through the system with more sucess and generally quicker....because this is how the sysem was designed to funnel them.

Just like those athleticlly inclined did better in Gym class.

As someone has been through the systems as a student, teacher, and practitioner, this really is not the advantage you seem to think. A massive part of law is learning how to research, not simply remember. Many of the exams I took at the English Bar were open book. They weren't interested in memory, they were interested in your ability to process, analyse, and apply. This makes a lot of sense when you think about it.

You seem to be talking about some vague mythical concept of what lawyers do that has little-to-no connection to the realities of the job.

a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

No. We're not paying the doctors several times. That's like saying we're paying the teachers several times.

In a government controlled health care scheme, the doctors are the bottom rung on the pay scale ladder just like the nurses are.

it's all the bureaucrats in between the taxpayer and the doctor that are making the real money.

So, we'd be ahead to just pay the doctor directly instead of paying for all those layers of bureaucrats.

It's like they say in education. The real money is in administration (bureaucrats).

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AkontaDarkpaw

No. We're not paying the doctors several times. That's like saying we're paying the teachers several times.

In a government controlled health care scheme, the doctors are the bottom rung on the pay scale ladder just like the nurses are.

it's all the bureaucrats in between the taxpayer and the doctor that are making the real money.

So, we'd be ahead to just pay the doctor directly instead of paying for all those layers of bureaucrats.

It's like they say in education. The real money is in administration (bureaucrats).

That makes sense... but what i really hate is the compartmentalization of payment.

You pay hospital, anesthesiologist, lab, xray tech, and dr receiving a bill for each.

If you're in the hospital you should pay 1 bill. Let them sort out who gets what.

We're self pay so i pay doctors directly when i need them. While it's tough financially its way better than paying the insurance when 98% of the time it doesn't cover my visits anyway. Then i end up paying twice.

Insurance imo is for the gullible who trade intelligence for "peace of mind".

That may be offensive to some and my apologies if it is. My grandmother and i went round and round about this issue. She always told me that when i got older I'd understand. Well i'm older and i still feel the same way.

Insurance is only useful when it is appropriate. In other words, purchasing catastrophic insurance like disability, accident, etc where BIG problems and expenses may be expected is intelligent.

If you're a certain age, then buying insurance in case you get diabetes or something makes sense and should be chosen by the individual based on their family history.

But just buying health insurance for hundreds of dollars jic and it being practically unusable doesn't make sense to me.

Car insurance has basic coverage and it actually PAYS. When does health insurance become usable? With the exception of tricare, I've never had a usable health insurance plan because of deductibles.

originally posted by: nerbot
a reply to: luciferslight

How could it be "free" if the public funds the government?

The government could redirect the taxes from those services. It's just a question bro. Calm your tets.

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: luciferslight
what would happen if all Doctors, lawyers, and other top paid professions were paid by the government. Then made those services free to the public? idk.

No one would want to be in those professions. Service and quality levels would fall dramatically.

The pay and quality stayed the same, only difference is instead of being paid privately, they are funded by redirected public funding.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: luciferslight
what would happen if all Doctors, lawyers, and other top paid professions were paid by the government. Then made those services free to the public? idk.

Our taxes would increase and the quality of services would decrease.

Personal taxes would be put into other programs. Sales taxes would go in these professions.

originally posted by: KawRider9
a reply to: luciferslight

You do know the government gets its money from the "public" right?

So your proposal is, we the people, pay the government, to pay the doctors, to give is free care? #ing brilliant!

Of course. Because on every tax form it says you must pay for the service you already are going to pay for. But where is the receipt for the Walmart shoes you bought that includes those taxes?