Unions and the Wisconsin Governor

[guido911]

Well obviously they're not listening to their constituents then.

If a teabagger had made that threat would you be trying to be cute? Nope. We would have to wrap your entire body in a Depends undergarment to contain the wetting you would be doing to yourself.

[Townsend]

If a teabagger had made that threat would you be trying to be cute? Nope. We would have to wrap your entire body in a Depends undergarment to contain the wetting you would be doing to yourself.

You refer to them as teabaggers?

A judge took their ball away from them.

We're having more bowel movements in our own state legislature than I care to hear about.  The WI news has lowered in importance to me.

Oh, and she's apparently a nutball.  So yeah, I don't care.  The "teabagger"s?  I find their leaders to be along the same line so no, I wouldn't be surprised at all.

[guido911]

Now this is a strike that I am certain would go over well in this country:

The Israeli Medical Association has announced the beginning of a doctors' strike on Tuesday. The strike, a warning measure, will last for two days, and will include the roughly 20,000 doctors working in the public system.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/143326

On the other hand, maybe it wouldn't because doctors are not the "working people".

[nathanm]

On the other hand, maybe it wouldn't because doctors are not the "working people".

What makes you say that? A lot of 'em are working stiffs.

Then there are the ones who take bribes from drug companies to prescribe expensive medications off-label or open MRI clinics and suddenly discover that all of their patients need MRIs for every little complaint so they can make a fortune fleecing Medicare and the insurance companies and drive up the cost of everybody's care. Those guys can go get stuffed.

Based on the expenditure numbers I've seen, Israel doesn't seem have many of those. Based on our numbers, I dare say half our doctors are of that sort.

[guido911]

What makes you say that? A lot of 'em are working stiffs.

Seriously? I agree that a "lot" are working stiffs, in particular a person very close to me. However, my gentle poke was at those who calls union members "working people", as if non-union folks with jobs are not.

Incidentally, could you just imagine if doctors formed a union, which required all doctors to join, and they went on strike over whatever (pay, tort reform) in this country? Would some people in this particular thread be speaking out on behalf of them?

[nathanm]

Seriously? I agree that a "lot" are working stiffs, in particular a person very close to me. However, my gentle poke was at those who calls union members "working people", as if non-union folks with jobs are not.

Incidentally, could you just imagine if doctors formed a union, which required all doctors to join, and they went on strike over whatever (pay, tort reform) in this country? Would some people in this particular thread be speaking out on behalf of them?

You have to admit it's a relatively new phenomenon for licensed professionals such as yourself to consider themselves "working class."

On this subject, I consider there to be three classes: First, the chronically un/underemployed. Second, the "working stiff." Third, the ownership class. Clearly, many owners work their butts off, but they do so for far more potential gain than an employee with no ownership stake does.

BTW, sympathy strikes are already illegal. If (to use an example) ALPA has a disagreement with American and strike, Continental pilots can't legally walk out, even though they're members of the "same" union. Similarly, if doctors unionized and struck Southcrest, they couldn't walk out at St. Francis. Of course, these days it seems doctors are rarely employees of the hospital anyway, so unionization makes little sense. (at least that's my understanding, feel free to correct me)

It makes no more sense than me unionizing me myself and I and striking..myself. Of course, now that I think about it, doctors do have a "union". It's called the AMA and they artificially restrict the supply of doctors.

That's not to say that I don't think there are definite advantages in the "doctors as employees" model found in many countries. I think it's generally unwise to have the guy ordering the procedures or prescribing the medicine getting a cut of the procedures or the medicine. It seems obvious to me that a doctor who was on the fence about ordering an MRI or a CT or whatever would probably order the procedure if it's in his financial interest to do so, whereas without that financial incentive, his decision would be solely based on what's best for the patient.

[nathanm]

And some people might find this interesting. Others will probably lose their smile over it:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/146921/Americans-Back-Unions-Governors-State-Disputes.aspx

[we vs us]

Incidentally, could you just imagine if doctors formed a union, which required all doctors to join, and they went on strike over whatever (pay, tort reform) in this country? Would some people in this particular thread be speaking out on behalf of them?

Yes.

You've built a lovely closetful of strawmen, there.  Who do you have in mind when you say "some in particular?"

[guido911]

Yes.

You've built a lovely closetful of strawmen, there.  Who do you have in mind when you say "some in particular?"

Those folks probably know who I am referring to. But since you weighed in, would you support a physician's strike if they were aggrieved over pay/benefits?

Nate, according to this article, the AMA only represents less than 20% of practicing docs.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=35055

[we vs us]

But since you weighed in, would you support a physician's strike if they were aggrieved over pay/benefits?

Yep.  Not because I think they deserve it but because I believe it's their right. 

[nathanm]

Nate, according to this article, the AMA only represents less than 20% of practicing docs.

Interesting.

Turns out I was wrong about AMA being solely responsible for limiting the number of residency slots available. It's actually ACGME that makes the decisions on that, and AMA representatives only make up a fifth of their board. (according to wikipedia, anyway)

[guido911]

Yep.  Not because I think they deserve it but because I believe it's their right.  

Well since you framed your response in that way, if they did form union and the docs wanted to strike, would it be "deserved"?

I know that this post is a bit awkward.

[we vs us]

Well since you framed your response in that way, if they did form union and the docs wanted to strike, would it be "deserved"?

I know that this post is a bit awkward.

Honestly I think all workers should have the ability to organize and they should be able to strike.  I personally don't think doctors are the most aggrieved workers out there, and I don't necessarily know who some would strike against (I'm not thinking of the docs who work at hospitals but more the docs who have their own practices), but in theory they should be able to organize. 

Why shouldn't they? 

[guido911]

Honestly I think all workers should have the ability to organize and they should be able to strike.  I personally don't think doctors are the most aggrieved workers out there, and I don't necessarily know who some would strike against (I'm not thinking of the docs who work at hospitals but more the docs who have their own practices), but in theory they should be able to organize. 

Why shouldn't they? 

They should be able to organize, but I do see it happening all that soon.

[Red Arrow]

and I don't necessarily know who some would strike against

I think most doctors are "employed" by insurance companies.  If your insurance breaks it out, look at the list price vs. what the doctors agreed to take.