Ron Paul is Against Licensing Doctors

Well there's yer problem!

 

Its hard to make the case, but it can be done.. Look David Michael Woodward.

 

Blackrook has found time to post on other threads but he hasn't come to post a link substantiating his lie that Ron Paul wants no regulations on doctors. Not surprising.

 

"“They've found doctors with long trails of malpractice payouts who were never disciplined. They've found doctors who have been repeatedly suspended by hospitals but had clear licenses,” he continued. Ornstein, a senior reporter at ProPublica, is a former Los Angeles Times staff writer."
http://www.latimes.com/news/politic...latimes/news/politics+(L.A.+Times+-+Politics)

Well, golly, it's pretty obvious that this licensing business is all about protecting patients, isn't it? Oh, wait, maybe it's about protecting doctors and making money for the professional organization.

Any more of the nonsense like Ron Paul is against the 20th Century or has the stupidity ended? Or perhaps someone would like to pretend that licensing attorney's is all about protecting the clients.

 

I'm no great fan of Ron Paul but I seriously doubt that he suggested that physicians not be licensed to practice by an oversight body. Regardless, what Ron Paul wants as regards to medical licensing is irrelevant. States license physicians, not the federal government.

 

he'd have a hard time getting customers, as he'd have to compete with those who have actually been trained

 

Except in CA. They love quacks out there. They only go to the Dr out there when they want to get some money (frivilous lawsuit).

 

This I do disagree with. People shouldn't be allowed to practice medicine, and become snake oil salesmen and con men and basically become doctors of the 1800's, just because of a retarded interpretation of "liberty".

 

They wouldn't. If the states stopped doing it, the state boards of medicine (private groups that already certify specialists) would step up and certify physicians. Insurance would only pay for certified physicians. There would be no difference except that the physicians would be paying their renewal fees to a private organization instead of the state. Yes, a few quacks would prey on stupid people, but that's the stupid people's fault.

 

Oh, so if someone in good faith assumes that a surgeon will do as they've supposedly been trained, and the surgeon has no idea what they're doing, that's the person's fault?

It's the surgeon's fault. Period.

You "right wingers" defending snake oil salesmen and con men has got to end.

 

There are people in the states that already go to these "snake oil" sales men. They go to people that claim crystals cleanse the body. People that claim hydroxy cut will get rid of fat. Theatons can be expunged from your body. Praying is the only way of getting rid of cancer. And being vegan will cleanse you of all toxins in your body. Not to mention the thousands of other dietary "treatments" out there. Stupid people spend money on stupid things. There are people NOT getting help from a Dr cause they think a vaccine will give them/their kids, autism.

 

Notice that these are all profit-motivated private businesses that propagate this crap. The government and FDA etc. wouldn't propagate such bull(*)(*)(*)(*).

Government =/= benevolent, but when it comes to health? It seems that at least in this country and other advanced nations, government is very pro-safety.

Private companies want to lower your safety and swindle you out of your money so that they can make a profit. How benevolent.

 

Yes those people exist and are admonished by the AMA.


Right wingers easily overlook the fact that regulations often prevent runaway lost cusumer confidence, because if consumer confidence dries up, every single one of your "free market" sound bites goes down the toilet.

 

Of course it's their fault. If you go to a doctor without knowing if they are board certified in their specialty, it is your fault. For example, a doctor legally can put his shingle out as a surgeon (even under current law) without being board certified in surgery. Before you let a surgeon cut you, you need to find out if he's board certified. This is no different than that.

Practically speaking, the only thing that this would do is transfer doctor certification to a private entity, instead of the states. It's not going to make it so that snake oil salesmen can do business, any more than they already are. Even with government licensing, there are people practicing medicine without a license.

http://www.ktvn.com/story/15445594/man-suspected-of-practicing-medicine-without-license

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/Police...icing-Medicine-Without-License-128350268.html

 

Don't anti-government people want no one to have to be certified formally to do anything?

 

Certification makes sense. It's licensing we're against. Certification means that the industry decides on the standards. It is market-based. Licensing means that the government decides on the standards. That is an infringement on liberty.

An example of this is scuba certification. There is no government license given to scuba instructors. I could hang my shingle out and become one tomorrow. However, no dive shops would honor the training I did. To get a dive shop to honor the training, I have to be a member of an association, who would test/certify me before allowing me to issue certifications to students. This is all done without the government, and it works fairly well and cheaply.

 

Oh, so you want to let businesses sell people on bull(*)(*)(*)(*). That's all I heard.

Private businesses do not want to make people healthier. They want to give people the ILLUSION that they will become more healthy given their products, and SWINDLE THEM OUT OF THEIR MONEY in the process.

Sometimes "freedom" stinks, doesn't it?

 

That's how the free market system works, buddy. You have one thing right, and that is that businesses want to make money. You get one business that wants to screw people over and you tend to get another business that doesn't and ends up stealing the consumer base of the first business. That is capitalism.

The reason this doesn't seem to work in medicine today is because it is all federally regulated. You wonder why there are soooo many pointless pills out there? It's because of corporatism, not capitalism. Those pharmaceutical companies are lead by people with positions in the FDA. So in this case, it isn't the free market that is screwing people over.

 

No, you want a society full of con men/snake oil salesmen who try to (even if non forcefully) swindle people out of their money, whilst being as unproductive as possible (if I'm unproductive yet sell a lot of people on my bull(*)(*)(*)(*), that's all good for me).

As utilitarian as it sounds, that's not the kind of society I want to live in.

All these companies that try to make these pills would still exist whether the FDA existed or not. Obviously people buy them, which means that there's a lot of profit to be made off of them. They'd just be more likely to be dangerous and wouldn't be pulled off the market if they were proven to be unsafe, as they'd hide such information from people as much as possible.

And, I'll trade your liberty to make unsafe products for my safety, any day of the millennium. The sooner anarcho-capitalists accept that, the better.

 

... like politicians do now?

 

Most of them, yes. I didn't say otherwise, however.

 

If private businesses find that certification helps sell their product, they do it. Do you think the doctors of this country want to open up their livelihood to just everybody? Of course not, they would set up private certification to save their own livelihoods.

Honestly, I don't have a problem with MDs being licensed by the government. However, I do think that if states didnt' license doctors, that private groups would start doing it.

The scuba example is true. It is the way it works. Why do you think they don't allow just anybody to instruct in scuba? Wouldn't they make more money if they let just anybody dive without instruction?

 

Who is a snake oil salesman?

 

Caveat Emptor.

 

What is productive?