> Coming from Walmart's perspective, I'm assuming it just seemed like a smart business decision rather than something maliciously intended.

I think that's exactly what the parent comment was criticizing:

>> Ugh. I think that this sort of attitude (which was my initial reaction too) is a big part of what's wrong with our current economy.

To restate: what's wrong with our economy is that we evaluate things, first and foremost, on if they're a "smart business decision" or not. That leads to "smart business decisions" are shady when looked at from many other perspectives.

> Doctors can choose to moonlight and get paid extra, and I don't think anyone is complaining about that.

Doctors have that choice, and yet they don't do that. I wonder why?

>In Medical Economics’ 2013 annual survey, 36% of family medicine/general practitioners and 35% of internists reported earning income from sources other than their primary practice/employer in 2012. That number was about the same for cardiologists (38%), but was higher for hospitalists (40%). Pediatricians and gastroenterologists were lower, at 25% and 27%, respectively.

http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/medical-economics...

Unless I missed it, that report doesn't indicate the total hours worked, only rates at which doctors perform work outside their primary clinical job.

There is also a massive difference between a doctor taking a side job because they enjoy it and a WalMart associate taking a delivery job because they have no choice.

> 35% of internists reported earning income from sources other than their primary practice

> There is also a massive difference between a doctor taking a side job because they enjoy it and a WalMart associate taking a delivery job because they have no choice.

I suggest you become more familiar with what medical interns get paid and their lifestyle. They are certainly moonlighting to pay the bills.

I doubt interns are moonlighting anywhere, as they don't have the accreditation to do so.

Perhaps you mean residents? The article discusses their options and does mention they might look for the extra income to pay down loans.

Regardless, the average salary for a family physician in the US somewhere around $175,000. Most specialists earn more. Yes, they can make poor financial choices and end up needing extra income, but at those income levels, I have to assume most of them are doing it for "fun".

Internist as in "internal medicine", not as in "unpaid intern".

In the US, we have medical interns. They have completed their classroom studies, but not yet started residencies. They typically work as poorly paid interns for 18 months(?), doing quick rotations through the various specialties, before moving on to their residencies.

They are paid poorly. I think the base rate is about $35k/year. But, at this point, they are still effectively students. I believe the MD is granted upon completion of the internship (or maybe they have the MD, but not the license to practice, I can never remember).

Ugh. Internist is not a synonym for intern, unpaid or otherwise. An 'internist' is a sub-specialty of fully-licensed medical doctor, as in 'internal medicine'. It's equivalent to a pediatrician except specifically focused on care for adult patients, in contrast to a 'family practice' or 'general practice' doctor, who focuses on both adult and pediatric patients.

There's also a massive difference between a doctor taking a side job because they have no choice and a Walmart associate taking a delivery job because they enjoy it.

Don't assume!

Everyone assumes doctors are these fabulously rich people when many of them don't make a whole lot of money when considered on an hours-worked basis.

The poor creatures! Between their Mercedes-Benzes and their 5000 sqft houses (don't underestimate heating and cooling for that amount of enclosed space!) and the private schools for their kids and the cruise holidays to Madagaskar there is hardly any money left at the end of the month.

Before this program was created they didn't have a choice. Now they do.

I'm pretty skeptical of the level to which they've dived into these results. 43% of the respondents said they receive supplemental income from "other medical" work. There exists a massive network of funding backed by pharmaceutical companies which essentially launders money into the pockets of physicians through things like highly-paid consultancy roles, speaking engagements, etc. Ostensibly these types of things would be covered by the 'speaking engagement' and 'consulting' categories, but the low figures there do not jive with my anecdotal knowledge of the field so I'm not really willing to accept these self-reported results as accurate considering that massive "other" result.

Just looking at the figures as presented, it seems the average rate of moonlighting is in the range of 34%, and of the types of moonlighting reported, I'd only characterize about 37% as direct medical practice. So that adds up to 13% of practitioners who are actually practicing medicine somewhere else in their free time. Not unheard of, but far from the norm, so I stand by my point. The great majority of doctors are not picking up shifts somewhere else, because the great majority of them don't need the extra income.

To add to that, a lot of doctors at urgent care clinics (after hours, at least) are moonlighting.

That just isn't true at all. In fact, it's patently false.

https://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/12/24/the-doctor-as-moon...

Beyond Doctors, a lot of software engineers are highly paid and moonlight as well.

Or startup founders driving for uber.

> Or startup founders driving for uber.

So it really happens? I though it was joke in "Silicon Valley" TV series S04E01.

Well I guess just making things up is one approach to debate, eh?