When did I say things where so bad for them?
As to the possibility that things might be bad, you can't just look at the top line, most people don't have medical skill bills, or malpractice insurance costs, etc., and most people don't have to wait through so much training before they make solid money for their chose career, but even considering that I don't think that doctors, or surgeons, as a group are suffering horribly, certainly finacially they tend to do better, often much better than most.
But I don't see how the fact that they make a lot of money is all that meaningful. If they made 10 times as much as they do, it wouldn't suggest that there needs to be some sort of government effort to reduce their income, or that we shouldn't care at all about any concerns or problems proposed or existing laws and regulations might cause the, and certainly it doesn't suggest that its perfectly ok to take whatever we want from them because they are rich.
How much someone makes, shouldn't be a political issue, except perhaps to the extent they make what they make through government. Of course the government does spend a lot on medical care, but its buying services in the market, which isn't the same as overpaying government employees, or tossing a lot of money to politician's cronies. If you can point to serious subsidies from the government for doctors, I'd probably be very open to eliminating them, and to the extent that doctors make more through government restraint of trade, I'd be all for getting rid of any restraint that isn't very solidly justified, but I'd be strongly against any sort of price controls, or government trying to force down doctors incomes, or the idea that since their wealthy its fine to impose very high tax rates on them (which might not be directly relevant to this conversation, but many on the left are pushing for tax increases). |
