Doctors who graduate without loans have more leverage when deciding their next position. They can immediately go for research or volunteer work that otherwise wouldn’t recoup their costs.
So maybe this will actually lose an effective lever at getting doctors to serve those populations?
The reality is doctors have the ability to practice anywhere and tend to choose desirable places to live like NYC, LA, etc because they are humans with wants and needs, too. Anecdotally, living in NYC, many doctors and dentists tell me they could make more elsewhere, but they love living in the city.
[1] https://comphealth.com/resources/physician-salary-report-202...
But there are tons of programs that will pay off your medical student loans if you go work in an undeserved area. Some states offer free tuition if you promise to work in that state for a few years after. The hope with that is that the person will establish roots and not leave.
Not to mention the 10 year Federal forgiveness for working in a qualified institution (aka nonprofit hospital/academic)
Public Service Loan Forgiveness requires 10 years of making student loan payments.
> Some states offer free tuition if you promise to work in that state for a few years after.
for example, the Georgia program offers up to $25k per year for up to 4 years max [1]. It requires application and takes into account health outcomes, specialty, debt, etc so it seems its not automatic acceptance. With an average medical school debt of over $200k this is not free tuition.
[1] https://healthcareworkforce.georgia.gov/loan-repayment-schol...
https://www.whitecoatinvestor.com/not-so-common-debt-forgive...
So why not structure it so the tuition is completely forgiven if someone does this rather unconditionally free?
I don't see why someone who goes to this medical school, only to become a cosmetic surgeon who ultimately makes millions a year doing discretionary procedures should have free tuition.
There seems to be some shift going on in society. Like we've acknowledged a world with "haves" and "have nots" is unavoidable, so we might as well just focus on diversifying the "haves" and give everyone an equal shot at winning the lottery.
I guess that's better, but it's a sad thing to settle for.