If we eliminate the profit margin and the layers of office jobs needed to work through complex insurance obstacles and to come up with great ideas like dropping patients off at homeless shelters when their insurance doesn’t pay, we can pay the remaining staff doing meaningful labor more.
If the CEO is buying yachts and mansions, there is no luck of money to pay staff, there’s lack of intent.
They don’t, not even close to the level of dumping residents off at homeless shelters. Hell all the issues I have seen are mostly due to a lack of funding and having a “hybrid” system (and can you guess that the for profit side is the issue?).
And at least here the jobs at most elder care pay well. Lots of little towns have the “lodge” as the main employer.
If we eliminate the profit margin and the layers of office jobs needed to work through complex insurance obstacles and to come up with great ideas like dropping patients off at homeless shelters when their insurance doesn’t pay, we can pay the remaining staff doing meaningful labor more.
If the CEO is buying yachts and mansions, there is no luck of money to pay staff, there’s lack of intent.
I just want to say good for you for trying to reason with someone like that
OK, so why do those same issues persists in nationalized systems then? Or do they still suffer from the ‘profit motive’?
Your argument seems to hinge on the idea that it’s a matter of emotion or will, rather than physical and economic resources.
You can pay them more, but that increases costs. The single biggest cost is the labor staffing.
They don’t, not even close to the level of dumping residents off at homeless shelters. Hell all the issues I have seen are mostly due to a lack of funding and having a “hybrid” system (and can you guess that the for profit side is the issue?).
And at least here the jobs at most elder care pay well. Lots of little towns have the “lodge” as the main employer.