[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by kcam213

I agree that not everyone is nursing material. You have to have a nuturing personality.

With all of the publicity over nurses' getting good salaries ($60,000+/year), benefits, and supposed job security, do you think we'll see an increasing number of people who go into it solely or primarily for the money (just like people going to medical school for that very reason)? Will we also see more males going into the field? Will an increase in the number of male nurses mean that they'll be more trysts in the middle of the night at hospitals? (Now, that's what I'd call a job with benefits.)

[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by kcam213

Then think about bankers, executives, lawyers, accountants, engineers who make just as much if not MORE than many healthcare workers, sometimes go for less education (sometimes just BA in business will suffice).

Note that part of a doctor's compensation is the job security, status, and very very high probability of finding a six figure job after the completion of education (residency).

In contrast, we have an oversupply of people in just about all of those fields you mentioned. We have a glut of MBAs and lawyers, all of whom are a dime-a-dozen and many of whom are never able to find jobs in their fields nor decent jobs outside of it.

So keep that in mind--part of a doctor's compensation is his job security, status, and very very high probability of landing a six figure job after graduation. (In contrast, I wouldn't be at all surprised if half or more than half of the new attorneys who graduate this year won't be able to find work in their field.)

Besides, I truly doubt that doctors would receive significantly less compensation if we went to socialized medicine. Heck, they could receive a raise and better working conditions (less insurance BS to deal with) and health care would probably still cost us less money since we'd be cutting out the wasteful and inefficient expenses of the insurance companies and their wealthy executives and owners who don't actually provide any real care but just push papers, attend conferences, and play golf, etc.

[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by Cliffie

But MDs in England get bonuses for things like keeping their people healthy, getting them onto exercise programs, and getting them to eat right and stop smoking. There are also incentives for keeping costs low -- e.g. not prescribing some new $500/mo drug when a $10 generic will do just as well.

Did you learn that from watching Sicko (which everyone should watch)?

[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

If we go to socialized medicine, you will see fewer people going into the medical profession. Why work that hard if you're not allowed to make more than the next guy? And those left in the field would be worked to death.

As long as 99% of all medical school graduates are guaranteed at least $150,000/year people will continue to break down the doors to medical school. One possible benefit of its becoming less lucrative is that perhaps a higher percentage of the people who go to medical school would be training to become doctors, not primarily for greedy financial and status reasons, but because they sincerely want to help other people.

[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by UpperPeninsulaRon

Very true. Let's look at four of the ten "recession proof" occupations. The article cites solar, wind, green, and energy efficiency. Is the publication trying to drive people into some course of study which the editors feel is laudable or are there really jobs in these fields?

Another issue is whether moving towards "green energy" actually makes economic sense. If it's more expensive than nuclear power or burning coal then, in terms of energy cost, it's really just a big "make work" project and essentially a higher tax on anyone who consumes electricity. New jobs might be created--but at the expense of electricity consumers; it's no different, in essence, than just raising people's taxes and using the revenue to fund "make work" projects.

We are in a recession, so there should be tons of these recession proof jobs listed in the employment pages of papers, websites, and the like. Would anyone like to show me companies that are currently hiring in these fields? Or are the editors attempting to herd the masses into studying subjects which simply are in tune with their belief systems?

The mainstream newspapers and magazines know who their client base is, and they don't think much of their client base's IQs. Also, they love to push the notion that education and job retraining is the solution to our nation's economic problems. It's easier to do that then to say that we need to address Global Labor Arbitrage (foreign outsourcing, mass immigration, work visas, etc.).

[kcam213]

Originally Posted by Bhaalspawn

With all of the publicity over nurses' getting good salaries ($60,000+/year), benefits, and supposed job security, do you think we'll see an increasing number of people who go into it solely or primarily for the money (just like people going to medical school for that very reason)? Will we also see more males going into the field? Will an increase in the number of male nurses mean that they'll be more trysts in the middle of the night at hospitals? (Now, that's what I'd call a job with benefits.)

Yes, there are many men who are retraining after years of working in plants and other "hard" industry now going into nursing school

I can't say that men are more likely to go into nursing for the money and therefore would be a less compasionate nurse. Like anything else, it really depends on the individual.

I don't think there would be more tyrst at night between staff. There has always been male resident doctors and female nurses to fulfill that.

I can say this; I work to earn a living. I enjoy what I do and I am often told that I am good at what I do; but make no mistake, I work to earn money. just like everyone else who goes to work to earn a living. So if more people are going to nursing school to earn money... more power to them!

It would be nice to have more people on the floor and stop being forced to work short and also having to choose between MANDATORY overtime or turn in your resignation and hand over your license!

[Dwatted Wabbit]

Originally Posted by UpperPeninsulaRon

Very true. Let's look at four of the ten "recession proof" occupations. The article cites solar, wind, green, and energy efficiency. Is the publication trying to drive people into some course of study which the editors feel is laudable or are there really jobs in these fields?
We are in a recession, so there should be tons of these recession proof jobs listed in the employment pages of papers, websites, and the like. Would anyone like to show me companies that are currently hiring in these fields? Or are the editors attempting to herd the masses into studying subjects which simply are in tune with their belief systems?

I think you nailed it. The article steers people towards PC business. Turning out solar panels will never be as labor intensive as turning out automobiles is.

Germany has gone whole-hog solar. I'd be interested to see employment stats regarding growth in the field there, where it's strongly encouraged.

[Cliffie]

Originally Posted by Bhaalspawn

Did you learn that from watching Sicko (which everyone should watch)?

I think I got it from Newsweek, actually, but I agree everyone should watch Sicko, even though it raises many, many more questions than it answers --WITHOUT TELLING YOU WHERE TO GET THE ANSWERS. That drives me nuts.

[Ivorytickler]

Originally Posted by Bhaalspawn

With all of the publicity over nurses' getting good salaries ($60,000+/year), benefits, and supposed job security, do you think we'll see an increasing number of people who go into it solely or primarily for the money (just like people going to medical school for that very reason)? Will we also see more males going into the field? Will an increase in the number of male nurses mean that they'll be more trysts in the middle of the night at hospitals? (Now, that's what I'd call a job with benefits.)

No. People don't go to med school for the money. Well, they may go but they don't graduate. I think the increase in pay for nurses will just make it a desirable major. That people who used to choose other options beause they could might choose it instead.

[Cliffie]

Originally Posted by Ivorytickler

No. People don't go to med school for the money. Well, they may go but they don't graduate. I think the increase in pay for nurses will just make it a desirable major. That people who used to choose other options beause they could might choose it instead.

Nursing has been a highly desirable field for decades. You can always find work, a lot of it is bedpan-free (like doing health education, mental-health counseling, psych evals or case management) and it's extremely portable. Nurses who gripe about the low pay they get are comparing themselves to doctors, who do in fact make a bundle more. Nurses haven't been truly low-paid since the 1970s.