The Motley Fool Discussion Boards

Previous Page

Hobbies & Interests / Debating Skills


Subject:  Re: Capitalism is the best economic system Date:  8/12/2012  12:27 PM
Author:  jerryab Number:  37 of 43

In every population of people some will want to study medicine. But will the supply of people be enough?

Generally, yes. There are almost ALWAYS more qualified applicants than available slots to train them all. It is ALWAYS better to start with more than you need--because some WILL drop out (for one reason or another). Once graduated, they will move into various areas of medicine. Given a large number of grads, they will fill most needs of the general public (statistical distribtution of interests).

If there is a shortage of general practitioners, a capitalist must consider if it reasonable to force doctors who might be choosing to specialize in areas of medicine that are deemed (by govt) unnecessary or superficial to NOT practice in these “wasteful” areas and to work as general practitioners.

They are highly-paid doctors. They *already* HAVE the resources to "waste" maintaining (or even expanding) their practices. "Waste" is a matter of opinion--and definition. Advertising cerates desire--not actual need (perception is everything). Look at the vanity medical profession as the perfect example. The doctors in a capitalist system don't care about anything except *personal* enrichment--because that is the definition of how the capitalist system works. To them (capitalists), everything else is incidental to making a profit.

For example, an analysis of why the financial sector is able to offer such high salaries to our most capable students might be performed? A capitalist would start this analysis assuming that the financial sector must be creating value, satisfying consumer needs.

Such an analysis would be fundamentally flawed. Why? For every buyer, there is (on the other side of the deal) a seller. One loses and one gains on the deal. It is a zero-sum game because it is not known which is the winner and which the loser. However,