We are talking about different things here, as I am referring to the overall time that it takes physicians to practice now, which frequently means more specialized training (more fellowships), more time and money involved in obtaining and maintaining board certifications, etc…
It’s about all of those things. It’s also about the fact that what the income inequality data does not take into account is the fact that in my example above, a carpenter has been working and making money for some 15 years, whereas a cardiothoracic surgeon has been studying and taking on loans, which have been accumulating interest during that entire period (this is only slightly mitigated by the slave wage that residents receive).
[quote]Yes becoming a doctor is very hard and expensive and thats why doctors are highly compensated.
This was the case in the 70’s and 80’s too. Barrier to entry for simple labor jobs is minimal and they’re not compensated highly. This was the case in the 70’s and 80’s too.[/quote]
The educational costs have far outpaced the rate of inflation, the educational demands have significantly increased (see my post above about fellowships), the accreditation requirements have gone way up (see my post above about the board certifications), and the liability risks have also increased.
Again, though, you first to identify a problem that you are trying to solve to come up with a solution. In my example above, if the cardio thoracic surgeon’s compensation is now higher than that of the carpenter and the difference in their salary is larger than it was some 30 years ago, is this a problem? If you invent something that has a transformational effect on people’s lives, and you become a billionaire as a result, is this a problem (if you had a transformational idea in the '70’s, without the internet and the technology your idea just did not have the ability to reach nearly as many people, so you didn’t make as much money)?
To me, what is a problem is people not having the same opportunities as others. This is something that I think should continue to be addressed regardless of whether we have income inequality or not. Likewise, simply taxing the highest earners more to “reduce income inequality” does nothing to create the same opportunities for others, which is the reason that it is more about campaign slogans than about anything else.