Why scott brown will win

[leaningright]

I know for fact we had a kid on the LSU wrestling team with a 3.88 gpa in pre med with a rich doctor dad and he couldn't get in. It took him two years after graduating to get in. Yes there are more than enough qualified students.

Well, I wouldn't question that, but every kid I have known who has wanted to get into Med. School has gotten into Med. School, considering that their grades were good enough. I am certainly not against the grade requirement. Don't want a "D" student doing heart surgery on me. I just don't see that big of a talent pool for the medical profession in our graduating students, which takes me to the "dumbing down" of education...another thread entirely.

 

[Topspin]

Well, I wouldn't question that, but every kid I have known who has wanted to get into Med. School has gotten into Med. School, considering that their grades were good enough. I am certainly not against the grade requirement. Don't want a "D" student doing heart surgery on me. I just don't see that big of a talent pool for the medical profession in our graduating students, which takes me to the "dumbing down" of education...another thread entirely.

They should take 3.0's in pre med not just like 3.77 and higher

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

You don't think Americans should pay for the healthcare of other Americans.

what does mississippi do for every one else? your state could get hit by an atomic bomb and tomorrow nothing would be different at all

 

[Socrtease]

I will try to find the report. It shows that they took the saving from tort reform and pumped it into covering the costs of care for the uninsured. It also states that the tort reform has not had as much of an effect on defensive medicine practices as they want. A point they want to address with the major medical groups in TX.

I am pretty sure it is in this report... though I would have to re-read to make sure this is the one....

http://tlrfoundation.com/beta/files/Texas_Tort_Reform_Report_2008.pdf

If it is right, it shows a reduction in defensive medical costs of 5+ billion dollars. But has the cost of health care gone DOWN? Or have they fees stayed the same with no end user reductions?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

If it is right, it shows a reduction in defensive medical costs of 5+ billion dollars. But has the cost of health care gone DOWN? Or have they fees stayed the same with no end user reductions?

From what I recall from that report...

1) they want further reductions in defensive practices....

2) they used the savings to provide more care for the uninsured, which resulted in no reductions to the paying consumer

Please note the words 'from what I recall'... I would have to re-read it to be certain.