You said "caregivers." I said implied "Profit Seekers." I'm not sure where your confusion is. And no only a fool would go into Medicine these days for money.
I don't disagree with that. That why I believe it's complete and total folly when they speak of repealing it in the next congress.
In this case, that they can be referred to as merely a for profit institution is a euphemism when they've gotten to a point where they can jack up premiums by as much as 40%. Ghouls maybe.
1)Let's make this perfectly clear , I have bills that need to be paid just like everybody else. So if rancorous assholes eliminate my ability to make a profit performing my profession what should I do? 2) Where did I say , I make all patient decisions based on my personal gain? 3) Why what do you think I'm missing? Personally I'm mindful of even when I'm not working that everyone that I meet is either a potential pt or relative of a patient I may meet. 4) You seem to be to have a problem with for profit corporations and that incorporating offers unfair advantages. a) Well just like myself an unprofitable company goes out of business ie (no longer providing pt care) b) FYI: Evidently you are ignorant of the fact that If I were to change from sole prop to a corporation I would automatically be placed in the highest tax bracket regardless of revenue. In short your biases/idiocy/ignorance displays you have never been self employed or owned a business. btw: You never answered the question: So according to you that (being sole prop is) fine as long as I don't incorporate?
Health care for profit, and paying workers in the health care industry are dramatically different. Say you have a non profit corporation that employs doctors who are not trying to get rich via the non profit corporation...just people who want to practice medicine and make a a reasonable wage. "You seem to be to have a problem with for profit corporations and that incorporating offers unfair advantages." Someone is in favor of unfair advantages? An unfair advantage is the exemption from the anti trust legislation, lobbying and peddling influence in congress, running bogus drug tests and skewing the results to make the drugs appear more effective than they actually are in real life usage, looking to the stockholders before the people who are being taken care of in health care, training doctors to never admit to being wrong so that they never admit liability...it is a long list...not treating people because it is not profitable, etc.
What I'm trying to get across to you dumbass is that I'm both employer and employee from a legal and tax perspective. How do you propose to handle that? Who gets to determine what is a "reasonable wage" idiots like you?
Everybody works for somebody if you have to work at all... Reasonable wage is pretty easy to determine...
Really, please elaborate on how much I should be allowed to earn according to you? So in your infinite wisdom do you treat sole prop health care providers as evil corporations?
A reasonable living. Do you know what reasonable is? You could run a non profit corporation and make a very reasonable living. It happens all the time. It all is a function of why the corporation exists, what is its primary function. Does it exist for the purpose of generating profits for the corporation? Does it exist to help others? Does it exist to provide jobs and opportunity for others? Does it exist like a shark? Or does it exist like a benevolent civilized human being?