I think the problem is not that they didn't recognize this fact, but that they intentionally ignored it in order to maintain an artificial scarcity of physicians, thereby ensuring higher wages.
That way the funding is scaled to the size of the industry without reevaluating it year to year.
I suppose it would end up in healthcare organizations working to have care classified as non-hospital to avoid the tax.
/s
That's never evidence and a well-labeled gateway to our own fallacy. There's a reason serious examination of an issue requires factual evidence in any field, from medicine to law to science, etc.
IME, in areas I lack expertise, the truth is usually intuitive but an unexpected intuition. The only solution, the only source of truth, is evidence.
Do I need to say this on HN? Sadly, it seems like it.
But now I see the name of your throwaway account. It's sad that you can't talk to other people respectfully.
The very sad and dangerous issue is, they don't seem to care or grasp the fallibility of their subjective judgment. Some even turn to ridicule as an argument, which of course is irrelevant and obstructs the search for truth.
Without truth, we are doomed. We only spin our wheels, sometimes excitedly, sometimes frantically, sometimes confidently - but it's all a waste of time and labor. We go nowhere; we gain nothing; we are in the same place tomorrow as today (or we may go backward). We don't even know what problems there are or how to solve them.
(The claim that existing members benefit also needs evidence: Existing members express feeling very overworked, which doesn't corroborate the claim, and most analyses I see say the the money is going to the insurance companies and the hospital owners and managment.)
At least the prediction of surplus of VCs in all other countries except US seems to be working well.
/s
I know how insulting this is, but asking this question implies either the one asking shouldn't participate in discussions of any kind, or is involved in the corruption