A possible solution may be for the state to subsidise the cost of > study and training, so that doctors are not under such pressure to > make " so much " in the shortest possible time ( yesterday ! ).
We do that already through very low interest rate loans for collage students and grants and scholarships. dj On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > You may be missing the point. Is a doctor moral if he chooses to let a > patient die if he is not paid " so much," when he is actually in a > position to save the life ? > > A possible solution may be for the state to subsidise the cost of > study and training, so that doctors are not under such pressure to > make " so much " in the shortest possible time ( yesterday ! ). > > I recall Dr Rieux's character in The Plague, written by Albert Camus. > > On Apr 7, 7:32 pm, Michael Berkovits <[email protected]> wrote: >> Agree with Molly. I don't understand any of the financial arguments >> presented. >> >> Some people cut trees down for a living, and make a certain amount of >> money per year doing it. Some people lend money for a living, and >> make a certain amount of money per year doing it. In the former case, >> you trade the trees for money. In the latter case, it's the >> difference between what the borrowing rate and the interest rate that >> lets you make money. Nothing immoral about it. Only reason some >> people, and various religions, feel that charging interest is immoral >> is because of the fact that we didn't really evolve to understand >> abstract ways of making money. Sell wood? Sure. Make a living off a >> spread? Harder to understand. But why immoral? >> >> As for medicine: Why are doctors paid so much? Because they're among >> the more talented people in society (i.e., intelligent - look at >> medical school acceptance rates), and they spend much longer in >> training than other people, so they have to be compensated by a lot to >> make the profession economically worthwhile. If doctors were paid >> less, more people who would otherwise be doctors would become lawyers, >> and medical care wouldn't be as good as it is now. So where would the >> morality be in that? Is every potential doctor who chooses to be a >> lawyer because the pay's better an immoral person? >> >> On Apr 7, 2:55 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> > Frayed knot is an interesting way of putting it. >> >> > I think society is more immoral than moral. I think most people agree that >> > killing some one is wrong. My problem with morality is when some one >> > charges excessive interest like in credit cards (my wife and I have one -- >> > and it is for emergencies only -- then immediately paid off ) justifying >> > this as sound business when in reality to me it seems like this greed is a >> > way of slowly killing some one, or Like ( i do have a very good health >> > insurance.) when I ended up in the hospital a few years back in the USA and >> > the bill exceeded $8,000. for 24 hour stay.. basically to get my heart >> > beat >> > stabilized and watched. I saw 2 doctors for a total of 10 minutes.. >> > If I did not have insurance i would have an huge medical bill and to pay it >> > I would have had to take food of my table to pay the bill. To me if a >> > person >> > is forced to pay an excessive amount to cover a bill cutting back on normal >> > expenses to pay it,, the hospital is killing that person. >> >> > or by charging excessive rent.. or a myriad of other ways of killing some >> > one legally .. the slower the better.. >> >> > On my savings account I am paid a meager 2.6 % but if I want to borrow >> > money >> > I have to pay 9.8% If I depended upon that interest for my living again >> > corporate greed would be killing me.. and this difference is immoral yet >> > it >> > is easily justified as business. >> >> > I think people many people only want to appear to be moral yet at the same >> > time want to use business or corporations to hide their immorality. >> >> > The only conclusion I can reach is people prefer to be immoral. Just >> > talking >> > the talk not walking the walk of morality. >> >> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Molly Brogan <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> > > Evil reconciled to good? Frayed knot! >> >> > > On Apr 5, 10:18 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > Why is evil always so hard to nail down or why does it seem that no >> > > > one really wants to identify it but simply dissect the potentiality of >> > > > what it may define. You don't consider anything on the video as evil >> > > > but do recognize it as bad, horrifying and obscene, which basically >> > > > covers the face of evil, but rather bypass evil representation to >> > > > bring attention to religious aspects, which by the way I agree with >> > > > 100%, don't burn your steak here. The dark ages are still upon us >> > > > brother and while technology creates a vision of advancement, >> > > > attitudes and behaviours create a different picture, the picture of >> > > > reality, of good and of evil. I feel we must somehow find resolve in >> > > > the issue of what is evil. We have here a collection of brilliant >> > > > minds, myself excluded lol, and so we can somehow be assertive in our >> > > > resolve. I find too many threads wind up as fray ends. Which reminds >> > > > me of a thread that walked into a bar, the bartender said "we don't >> > > > serve threads", so the thread walked out, shredded out it's end and >> > > > tied itself into a loop, walked back into the bar, the bartender >> > > > noticed and immediately and irately said, "damn, I told you we don't >> > > > serve threads in here", the thread responded "I'm not a thread" at >> > > > which the bartender scowled, "you are so" and so the thread having the >> > > > last word said "nope, I'm a frayed knot". >> >> > > > On Apr 5, 12:26 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > Thanks Slip. I don't really consider what is going on in the video >> > > > > and what it represents as evil. It is bad, it is horrifying, it is >> > > > > obscene, but it is also no more than religion battling it's fiercest >> > > > > foe -- education and enlightenment. On the other hand, religion >> > > > > considers education and enlightenment evil -- the work of the devil. >> >> > > > > On Apr 4, 2:05 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > > Thanks for the video gruff, it was overwhelmingly sad but very >> > > > > > enlightening as to the seriousness and the dilemma of these people. >> > > It >> > > > > > takes me back over to the other thread, Does Evil Exist. One only >> > > > > > needs to watch this video for the answer. >> >> > > > > > On Apr 4, 3:38 pm, gruff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > > > > > > Here is a good reason for moral behavior -- call it what you like >> > > (we >> > > > > > > are our brother's keeper, the golden rule, do unto others, etc.) >> > > > > > > -- >> > >http://video.nytimes.com/video/2009/02/22/world/asia/1194838044017/cl... >> >> > -- >> > ( >> > ) >> > I_D Allan- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Minds-Eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
