Lucrative careers?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
jhg885
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:53 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by jhg885 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm

HornedToad wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:45 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:08 am
If anyone has any doubts about the starting compensation for software engineers at the FAANGs or FAANG-like companies, I would advise that they check out https://www.levels.fyi/ and https://www.teamblind.com/articles/All, which are popular amongst those actually in the industry. TC ("total compensation" in tech industry parlance) has risen greatly over the last 5-10 years, and $200k total compensation for a NEW GRAD software engineer with ZERO working experience is not only possible, but actually a common occurrence. With 5-10 years of experience, many software engineers are pulling in $300k+ or $400k+. This not not only possible but very typical at the top companies.

Such high numbers are somewhat limited to the top companies, but keep in mind we're still talking about tens of thousands of software engineers each. People outside the industry confuse salary with total compensation, software engineers with hardware engineers, or software engineers with a whole host of other IT roles, program managers with product managers, QA engineers with DevOps, and so on thinking it makes no difference in compensation but it does very significantly.
You shouldn't use new hires to Google as being representative of the general software engineer population. I also wouldn't say it's "typical" at the large companies. It's not necessarily atypical but it's not common unless you joined from college at a tier 1 company and followed that path forward.

KyleAAA's statement that you'll eventually get to $200k with software engineering is much more defensible, even across cities in the U.S and outside of dedicated tech companies. Walmart, Target, consulting firms, etc. will also eventually pay high end software engineers $200k+ in total comp.
I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm

munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:39 am
munemaker wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:19 am
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:12 am
munemaker wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 6:56 pm

Nurse anesthetists do. I know one.

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/q ... -243k.html
nurse anesthetist are not RNs they are CRNAs. I'm in medicine I know more than a dozen.
I think they are RNs with additional certifications. Can you be a CRNA without being a RN first? I kind of doubt it.
You need several years of additional schooling, in a program that's hard to get accepted to by RNs. It's like saying a PhD and a Bachelors are the same, just one needs additional years of training. You can doubt it all you want, You are wrong.
CRNAs are RNs:
Before becoming a nurse anesthetist, candidates typically work in acute care settings (e.g., emergency rooms or intensive care units) as registered nurses (RNs) for at least a year. The AANA reports that in order for an RN to become certified in administering aesthetics, they must first complete an accredited program.
Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.

Rifampin
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by Rifampin » Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:54 pm

masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:39 am
munemaker wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:19 am
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:12 am


nurse anesthetist are not RNs they are CRNAs. I'm in medicine I know more than a dozen.
I think they are RNs with additional certifications. Can you be a CRNA without being a RN first? I kind of doubt it.
You need several years of additional schooling, in a program that's hard to get accepted to by RNs. It's like saying a PhD and a Bachelors are the same, just one needs additional years of training. You can doubt it all you want, You are wrong.
CRNAs are RNs:
Before becoming a nurse anesthetist, candidates typically work in acute care settings (e.g., emergency rooms or intensive care units) as registered nurses (RNs) for at least a year. The AANA reports that in order for an RN to become certified in administering aesthetics, they must first complete an accredited program.
Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
You are wrong masonstone. Actually there are still some MD programs that will accept applicants without a bachelors degree. Also all CRNAs are RNs with additional schooling. As munemaker pointed out the RN in CRNA does represent a registered nurse with a masters level degree as a nurse anesthetist.

golfCaddy
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by golfCaddy » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:30 pm

Does this thread have a point anymore? The OP hasn't been here in 3 months.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm

jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
HornedToad wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:45 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:08 am
If anyone has any doubts about the starting compensation for software engineers at the FAANGs or FAANG-like companies, I would advise that they check out https://www.levels.fyi/ and https://www.teamblind.com/articles/All, which are popular amongst those actually in the industry. TC ("total compensation" in tech industry parlance) has risen greatly over the last 5-10 years, and $200k total compensation for a NEW GRAD software engineer with ZERO working experience is not only possible, but actually a common occurrence. With 5-10 years of experience, many software engineers are pulling in $300k+ or $400k+. This not not only possible but very typical at the top companies.

Such high numbers are somewhat limited to the top companies, but keep in mind we're still talking about tens of thousands of software engineers each. People outside the industry confuse salary with total compensation, software engineers with hardware engineers, or software engineers with a whole host of other IT roles, program managers with product managers, QA engineers with DevOps, and so on thinking it makes no difference in compensation but it does very significantly.
You shouldn't use new hires to Google as being representative of the general software engineer population. I also wouldn't say it's "typical" at the large companies. It's not necessarily atypical but it's not common unless you joined from college at a tier 1 company and followed that path forward.

KyleAAA's statement that you'll eventually get to $200k with software engineering is much more defensible, even across cities in the U.S and outside of dedicated tech companies. Walmart, Target, consulting firms, etc. will also eventually pay high end software engineers $200k+ in total comp.
I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm

Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:54 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:39 am
munemaker wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:19 am

I think they are RNs with additional certifications. Can you be a CRNA without being a RN first? I kind of doubt it.
You need several years of additional schooling, in a program that's hard to get accepted to by RNs. It's like saying a PhD and a Bachelors are the same, just one needs additional years of training. You can doubt it all you want, You are wrong.
CRNAs are RNs:
Before becoming a nurse anesthetist, candidates typically work in acute care settings (e.g., emergency rooms or intensive care units) as registered nurses (RNs) for at least a year. The AANA reports that in order for an RN to become certified in administering aesthetics, they must first complete an accredited program.
Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
You are wrong masonstone. Actually there are still some MD programs that will accept applicants without a bachelors degree. Also all CRNAs are RNs with additional schooling. As munemaker pointed out the RN in CRNA does represent a registered nurse with a masters level degree as a nurse anesthetist.
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.

Rifampin
Posts: 77
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2016 10:13 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by Rifampin » Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:59 pm

masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:54 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:39 am


You need several years of additional schooling, in a program that's hard to get accepted to by RNs. It's like saying a PhD and a Bachelors are the same, just one needs additional years of training. You can doubt it all you want, You are wrong.
CRNAs are RNs:
Before becoming a nurse anesthetist, candidates typically work in acute care settings (e.g., emergency rooms or intensive care units) as registered nurses (RNs) for at least a year. The AANA reports that in order for an RN to become certified in administering aesthetics, they must first complete an accredited program.
Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
You are wrong masonstone. Actually there are still some MD programs that will accept applicants without a bachelors degree. Also all CRNAs are RNs with additional schooling. As munemaker pointed out the RN in CRNA does represent a registered nurse with a masters level degree as a nurse anesthetist.
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
UVA medical school.
https://med.virginia.edu/admissions/app ... uirements/
Website states bachelors is preferred but not required. There are a few more but I think you get the idea. But to answer this thread, yes CRNA is a lucrative field with relatively low tuition cost compared to that of medical school.

KyleAAA
Posts: 6728
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by KyleAAA » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:07 pm

yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
HornedToad wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:45 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:08 am
If anyone has any doubts about the starting compensation for software engineers at the FAANGs or FAANG-like companies, I would advise that they check out https://www.levels.fyi/ and https://www.teamblind.com/articles/All, which are popular amongst those actually in the industry. TC ("total compensation" in tech industry parlance) has risen greatly over the last 5-10 years, and $200k total compensation for a NEW GRAD software engineer with ZERO working experience is not only possible, but actually a common occurrence. With 5-10 years of experience, many software engineers are pulling in $300k+ or $400k+. This not not only possible but very typical at the top companies.

Such high numbers are somewhat limited to the top companies, but keep in mind we're still talking about tens of thousands of software engineers each. People outside the industry confuse salary with total compensation, software engineers with hardware engineers, or software engineers with a whole host of other IT roles, program managers with product managers, QA engineers with DevOps, and so on thinking it makes no difference in compensation but it does very significantly.
You shouldn't use new hires to Google as being representative of the general software engineer population. I also wouldn't say it's "typical" at the large companies. It's not necessarily atypical but it's not common unless you joined from college at a tier 1 company and followed that path forward.

KyleAAA's statement that you'll eventually get to $200k with software engineering is much more defensible, even across cities in the U.S and outside of dedicated tech companies. Walmart, Target, consulting firms, etc. will also eventually pay high end software engineers $200k+ in total comp.
I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.
I don't work at a FANG and my total compensation is in the same ballpark. Granted, I have been at this 15 years instead of just 7 and have taken a bit of a more circuitous route, but that level of TC is in no way limited to Stanford graduates at FANG. And while it's true making $400k with 7 yoe is not representative of the industry as a whole, breaking $200k 10-20 years into your career in most major cities certainly is. I got offers for more than $200k from non-tech companies in non-tech hubs and so has pretty much everyone else I know who has switched recently with a comparable amount of experience.

User avatar
triceratop
Moderator
Posts: 5654
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2015 8:20 pm
Location: la la land

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by triceratop » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:15 pm

masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
US Senator Rand Paul graduated from the Duke allopathic program and does not have a bachelors degree. Probably doesn't hurt to have a father who is a congressman. Things have changed since but you already have the UVA program mentioned above.
"To play the stock market is to play musical chairs under the chord progression of a bid-ask spread."

golfCaddy
Posts: 704
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 10:02 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by golfCaddy » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:49 pm

KyleAAA wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:19 pm
True, but there are a lot of companies outside of FAANG+MSFT that DO pay around that much, and not just in SV/Seattle/Boston. Nobody argued that ALL software engineers earned that much, just that most competent software engineers could if they choose to live in a tech hub and pursue it. Of course, there are a lot of programmers out there who couldn’t make the cut, as well. $200k+ is very reachable in cities like Atlanta, Chicago, Austin, Minneapolis, DC, etc in addition to the traditional hubs, but again, not every engineer in those cities is going to be able to hit that milestone. And $200k+ in Atlanta is just as good as $400k in SV.
If I seriously thought I could eventually make $150k+ in total comp as an individual contributor, I would be going back to grad school again for a CS degree.

KyleAAA
Posts: 6728
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by KyleAAA » Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:53 pm

golfCaddy wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:49 pm
KyleAAA wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 12:19 pm
True, but there are a lot of companies outside of FAANG+MSFT that DO pay around that much, and not just in SV/Seattle/Boston. Nobody argued that ALL software engineers earned that much, just that most competent software engineers could if they choose to live in a tech hub and pursue it. Of course, there are a lot of programmers out there who couldn’t make the cut, as well. $200k+ is very reachable in cities like Atlanta, Chicago, Austin, Minneapolis, DC, etc in addition to the traditional hubs, but again, not every engineer in those cities is going to be able to hit that milestone. And $200k+ in Atlanta is just as good as $400k in SV.
If I seriously thought I could eventually make $150k+ in total comp as an individual contributor, I would be going back to grad school again for a CS degree.
You definitely can. In Seattle, we pay new grads close to that. Elsewhere, it might take you 10 years or so.

User avatar
market timer
Posts: 5944
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 1:42 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by market timer » Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:25 pm

jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k.
How much of this is due to getting lucky with RSU appreciation? If not for the bull market, wouldn't you be in the $250K range? If someone were to join the company at your level today, what would be the target compensation?

HEDGEFUNDIE
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:06 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by HEDGEFUNDIE » Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:34 pm

market timer wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:25 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k.
How much of this is due to getting lucky with RSU appreciation? If not for the bull market, wouldn't you be in the $250K range? If someone were to join the company at your level today, what would be the target compensation?
Some tech companies give out RSUs in terms of $, not # of shares. So you are guaranteed that amount of $ no matter what happens to the stock. Of course that also caps your upside.

KyleAAA
Posts: 6728
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by KyleAAA » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:08 pm

market timer wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:25 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k.
How much of this is due to getting lucky with RSU appreciation? If not for the bull market, wouldn't you be in the $250K range? If someone were to join the company at your level today, what would be the target compensation?
Can't speak for jhg, but at my level target at FANG with no stock appreciation would be $400-450k. It's not mostly a stock appreciation story, although that helps.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:21 pm

KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:07 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
HornedToad wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:45 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Aug 26, 2018 6:08 am
If anyone has any doubts about the starting compensation for software engineers at the FAANGs or FAANG-like companies, I would advise that they check out https://www.levels.fyi/ and https://www.teamblind.com/articles/All, which are popular amongst those actually in the industry. TC ("total compensation" in tech industry parlance) has risen greatly over the last 5-10 years, and $200k total compensation for a NEW GRAD software engineer with ZERO working experience is not only possible, but actually a common occurrence. With 5-10 years of experience, many software engineers are pulling in $300k+ or $400k+. This not not only possible but very typical at the top companies.

Such high numbers are somewhat limited to the top companies, but keep in mind we're still talking about tens of thousands of software engineers each. People outside the industry confuse salary with total compensation, software engineers with hardware engineers, or software engineers with a whole host of other IT roles, program managers with product managers, QA engineers with DevOps, and so on thinking it makes no difference in compensation but it does very significantly.
You shouldn't use new hires to Google as being representative of the general software engineer population. I also wouldn't say it's "typical" at the large companies. It's not necessarily atypical but it's not common unless you joined from college at a tier 1 company and followed that path forward.

KyleAAA's statement that you'll eventually get to $200k with software engineering is much more defensible, even across cities in the U.S and outside of dedicated tech companies. Walmart, Target, consulting firms, etc. will also eventually pay high end software engineers $200k+ in total comp.
I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.
I don't work at a FANG and my total compensation is in the same ballpark. Granted, I have been at this 15 years instead of just 7 and have taken a bit of a more circuitous route, but that level of TC is in no way limited to Stanford graduates at FANG. And while it's true making $400k with 7 yoe is not representative of the industry as a whole, breaking $200k 10-20 years into your career in most major cities certainly is. I got offers for more than $200k from non-tech companies in non-tech hubs and so has pretty much everyone else I know who has switched recently with a comparable amount of experience.
I was a software developer too. But 200K is different from 400K. Let me ask you, what's your change of making 800K in the next 15 years? What I am trying to say is, 400K is way above average for a software developer with 10-15 years of experience in the U.S.. It is likely more achievable in the west coast. Yes it is doable but not a norm. I know someone who immigrated to the U.S. 20 years ago. She only had an English degree then but she changed her career and moved into finance 17 years ago and she now makes over 700K the last three years working for a bank on the east coast. It is inspirational and it is doable but not typical and requires effort and luck.

KyleAAA
Posts: 6728
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 5:35 pm
Contact:

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by KyleAAA » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:26 pm

yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:21 pm
KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:07 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
HornedToad wrote:
Thu Aug 30, 2018 9:45 pm


You shouldn't use new hires to Google as being representative of the general software engineer population. I also wouldn't say it's "typical" at the large companies. It's not necessarily atypical but it's not common unless you joined from college at a tier 1 company and followed that path forward.

KyleAAA's statement that you'll eventually get to $200k with software engineering is much more defensible, even across cities in the U.S and outside of dedicated tech companies. Walmart, Target, consulting firms, etc. will also eventually pay high end software engineers $200k+ in total comp.
I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.
I don't work at a FANG and my total compensation is in the same ballpark. Granted, I have been at this 15 years instead of just 7 and have taken a bit of a more circuitous route, but that level of TC is in no way limited to Stanford graduates at FANG. And while it's true making $400k with 7 yoe is not representative of the industry as a whole, breaking $200k 10-20 years into your career in most major cities certainly is. I got offers for more than $200k from non-tech companies in non-tech hubs and so has pretty much everyone else I know who has switched recently with a comparable amount of experience.
I was a software developer too. But 200K is different from 400K. Let me ask you, what's your change of making 800K in the next 15 years? What I am trying to say is, 400K is way above average for a software developer with 10-15 years of experience in the U.S.. It is likely more achievable in the west coast. Yes it is doable but not a norm. I know someone who immigrated to the U.S. 20 years ago. She only had an English degree then but she changed her career and moved into finance 17 years ago and she now makes over 700K the last three years working for a bank on the east coast. It is inspirational and it is doable but not typical and requires effort and luck.
Meh, for me the jump was just moving to the west coast. As for my chances to make $800k personally in the next 15 years? I would say 0 because I will likely choose to retire long before I get there. But if I choose not to retire and work hard toward that goal? Realistically, maybe 60%-70% or so. Pretty decent odds. And of course it requires work and a bit of luck, but I’m not aware of anybody pitching it as easy money.

But I feel like people keep trying to move the goalpost, because my initial comment that spurred this whole conversation was that there are “plenty of tech companies paying $200k,” which is objectively true. Nobody has ever argued that an average software engineer would ever earn anywhere near $400k to my knowledge. But for some reason, people seem to find it hard to believe that quite a few engineers do make that much, and actually much more at the high end.
Last edited by KyleAAA on Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:33 pm

KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:26 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:21 pm
KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:07 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm


I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.
I don't work at a FANG and my total compensation is in the same ballpark. Granted, I have been at this 15 years instead of just 7 and have taken a bit of a more circuitous route, but that level of TC is in no way limited to Stanford graduates at FANG. And while it's true making $400k with 7 yoe is not representative of the industry as a whole, breaking $200k 10-20 years into your career in most major cities certainly is. I got offers for more than $200k from non-tech companies in non-tech hubs and so has pretty much everyone else I know who has switched recently with a comparable amount of experience.
I was a software developer too. But 200K is different from 400K. Let me ask you, what's your change of making 800K in the next 15 years? What I am trying to say is, 400K is way above average for a software developer with 10-15 years of experience in the U.S.. It is likely more achievable in the west coast. Yes it is doable but not a norm. I know someone who immigrated to the U.S. 20 years ago. She only had an English degree then but she changed her career and moved into finance 17 years ago and she now makes over 700K the last three years working for a bank on the east coast. It is inspirational and it is doable but not typical and requires effort and luck.
Meh, for me the jump was just moving to the west coast. As for my chances to make $800k personally in the next 15 years? I would say 0 because I will likely choose to retire long before I get there. But if I choose not to retire and work hard toward that goal? Realistically, maybe 60%-70% or so. Pretty decent odds.
800K as a software engineer? Well good for you if inflation stays the way it is :-) I can say you are definitely special unless you field is in AI and even in that area the pay will level out.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:37 pm

KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:26 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:21 pm
KyleAAA wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:07 pm
yoyo6713 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:49 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm


I mostly agree. I never claimed to represent that all or even most software engineers as making those kind of figures. There are a LOT of software engineers out there and indeed nowhere did I mention that I was speaking for the average case (I specifically described it to be the case at the top, large tech employers).

However, so as long as this thread is about "lucrative careers", I don't think we need to limit the discussion purely to the average case. I think it is worth exploring the "certainly better than average but still achievable for many" case, regardless of industry. My point is that the compensation figures discussed are probably much more common than people might otherwise realize. TC approaching $200k (and sometimes exceeding it) for very junior (<3 years of experience) or new grad software engineers at the top tech companies IS indeed typical in Silicon Valley. Again, this is NOT to say that the average engineer will be be qualified to get into these companies -- far from it. Every career path can be very lucrative at the top, whether its finance, law, real estate, medicine, consulting, artist, etc. I just think software engineering is one of the most accessible ("easiest", if you will) and reliable professions in which to achieve such high compensation for a motivated individual.

I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k. I am not an unusual case in the organization and in fact, I work with many colleagues younger than I am who are at higher levels (sometimes substantially). To be clear, this is NOT representative of the industry as a whole. However, if you asked me to go into any other field/profession and make the same amount of money I would never bet my chances on it. I did not go to an elite university or stand out remarkably from my peers. And I do not feel substantially sharper than most of the people I encounter in daily life or read on Bogleheads. Just my 2c.
Consider yourself lucky/fortunate considering the performance of FANGs in the past 10 years. Maybe you don't feel substantially sharper but it is all in the eye of the beholder. You might be more skillful in your area than you thought. Plus who knows how FANGs will behave in the next 10 years.

Just my 2c.
I don't work at a FANG and my total compensation is in the same ballpark. Granted, I have been at this 15 years instead of just 7 and have taken a bit of a more circuitous route, but that level of TC is in no way limited to Stanford graduates at FANG. And while it's true making $400k with 7 yoe is not representative of the industry as a whole, breaking $200k 10-20 years into your career in most major cities certainly is. I got offers for more than $200k from non-tech companies in non-tech hubs and so has pretty much everyone else I know who has switched recently with a comparable amount of experience.
I was a software developer too. But 200K is different from 400K. Let me ask you, what's your change of making 800K in the next 15 years? What I am trying to say is, 400K is way above average for a software developer with 10-15 years of experience in the U.S.. It is likely more achievable in the west coast. Yes it is doable but not a norm. I know someone who immigrated to the U.S. 20 years ago. She only had an English degree then but she changed her career and moved into finance 17 years ago and she now makes over 700K the last three years working for a bank on the east coast. It is inspirational and it is doable but not typical and requires effort and luck.
Meh, for me the jump was just moving to the west coast. As for my chances to make $800k personally in the next 15 years? I would say 0 because I will likely choose to retire long before I get there. But if I choose not to retire and work hard toward that goal? Realistically, maybe 60%-70% or so. Pretty decent odds.

But I feel like people keep trying to move the goalpost, because my initial comment that spurred this whole conversation was that there are “plenty of tech companies paying $200k,” which is objectively true. Nobody has ever argued that an average software engineer would ever earn anywhere near $400k to my knowledge. But for some reason, people seem to find it hard to believe that quite a few engineers do make that much, and actually much more at the high end.
I saw you edited your post. That was not my point. I am fully aware a software engineer can make 7 figure salaries but that I won't use 400K+ as a motivation for average career choice.
Last edited by yoyo6713 on Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:38 pm

dup post deleted.
Last edited by yoyo6713 on Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:39 pm

dup post deleted.
Last edited by yoyo6713 on Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:40 pm

dup post deleted.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:41 pm

dup post deleted.

yoyo6713
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 8:48 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by yoyo6713 » Sun Sep 02, 2018 10:41 pm

dup post deleted.

jhg885
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2018 5:53 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by jhg885 » Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:33 am

market timer wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 8:25 pm
jhg885 wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 2:25 pm
I happen to be a software engineer at one of the FANGs with ~7 years of experience. My AGI was $375k-$400k in each of the last three years. This year my W-2 is probably going to be over $420k.
How much of this is due to getting lucky with RSU appreciation? If not for the bull market, wouldn't you be in the $250K range? If someone were to join the company at your level today, what would be the target compensation?
You're right, some of it is due to RSU appreciation between the time the shares were granted and the time they vested. For my individual situation, if the RSUs stayed completely flat from the time they were granted, I would be looking at annual TC of around $300k instead, which I think is reasonable for someone just joining at my level (leaning towards the higher end though, my guess is average might be closer to $275k).

When formulating job offers, FANG-like companies often allow some leeway in negotiating a balance between equity and salary+cash bonus compensation. Some like Netflix are reputed to generally favor cash over equity in the balance. I *personally* like tweaking things to be a bit more equity heavy because of the feeling it gives of "investing" money that you haven't technically yet been paid.

User avatar
XtremeSki2001
Posts: 1615
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by XtremeSki2001 » Mon Sep 03, 2018 6:33 am

HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:47 am
XtremeSki2001 wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:09 am
Spedward wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 11:43 pm
Accounting. It can never hurt to learn the laungage of Business.
Accounting, auditing, consulting ... working for a big4 will generally net someone $100k by year 5 or 6 (and often earlier).
+1.

Was just messaged on LinkedIn by a Big4 recruiter for a consulting role at $180k + 25% bonus. 10 years of work experience.
I get these, too. They give me pause and I consider it for a few seconds. Then I remember all that comes with it ... travel, long hours, weekend work, hectic schedule, working holidays, etc. It was good for starting a career, but only a few can make the sacrifices necessary to stay through Partner.
wabbajack wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 10:07 am
XtremeSki2001 wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:09 am
Spedward wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 11:43 pm
Accounting. It can never hurt to learn the laungage of Business.
Accounting, auditing, consulting ... working for a big4 will generally net someone $100k by year 5 or 6 (and often earlier).

Qualification - Worked at a big4 for too long.
I know a lady who's going to be a senior with a big 4 (Year 3-4 out of college). The hours are silly and the pay is mediocre. Although she does tell me it's interesting work, so maybe worth doing if it appeals to you? There is a definite payoff once you make senior, but you have to really like to work I suppose.
Money at Big4 really doesn’t start coming in until Late Senior / early Manager (4-6 years in). The work you do at these firms can vary widely and also has to do with ones performance. For example, if you’re an average performer or in the top 15% ... your comp for a year could be 7% base increase / 4% bonus vs 17% base increase / 20% bonus. If you’re a consistent top performer ... you’re paid handsomely, but you’ll work for it.

Most, as you alluded, stay until they’re Manager and cash in when they move to industry.
A box of rain will ease the pain and love will see you through

WJW
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 10:07 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by WJW » Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:36 am

HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:38 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 pm
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:47 am
XtremeSki2001 wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:09 am
Spedward wrote:
Fri May 11, 2018 11:43 pm
Accounting. It can never hurt to learn the laungage of Business.
Accounting, auditing, consulting ... working for a big4 will generally net someone $100k by year 5 or 6 (and often earlier).
+1.

Was just messaged on LinkedIn by a Big4 recruiter for a consulting role at $180k + 25% bonus. 10 years of work experience.
Are you going to take it?
Hello no you couldn’t pay me enough to go back into consulting
Just curious, what is wrong with consulting?

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Mon Sep 03, 2018 2:39 pm

Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:59 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:54 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm


CRNAs are RNs:


Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
You are wrong masonstone. Actually there are still some MD programs that will accept applicants without a bachelors degree. Also all CRNAs are RNs with additional schooling. As munemaker pointed out the RN in CRNA does represent a registered nurse with a masters level degree as a nurse anesthetist.
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
UVA medical school.
https://med.virginia.edu/admissions/app ... uirements/
Website states bachelors is preferred but not required. There are a few more but I think you get the idea. But to answer this thread, yes CRNA is a lucrative field with relatively low tuition cost compared to that of medical school.
Although the website says preferred there are currently Zero students at UVA medical school that don't have a Bachelors degree. I know this by asking the admissions office at UVA.

redraider11
Posts: 26
Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2018 10:11 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by redraider11 » Mon Sep 03, 2018 4:33 pm

sschoe2 wrote:
Mon May 14, 2018 11:34 am
dash9890 wrote:
Sun May 13, 2018 3:42 pm
I would encourage you to look into Clinical Laboratory Science, especially if you enjoy biology and the other sciences. It is a behind the scenes medical profession with little to no patient contact but pay mirrors that of RNs. I have been working as a Clinical Laboratory Scientist for about 2 years I started out at 55k with a 6k sign on bonus, and just 2 years later my base pay is 65k, and if you add on shift differentials, overtime, and bonuses I make around 80k. Also there is currently a huge shortage of licensed people in the US so finding a job is not going to be a problem pretty much anywhere you live, I had 7 job offers 6 months before I even graduated.
What I've heard about the profession is less promising. First off you either need a science or medical technology BS and a year of rotations. The pay depends very much on where you live and in some places they hire more AS level technicians because they cost less. The salaries around me are $38-45k. It is among the lowest paid healthcare professions, kind of dead end, and boring. You follow the established protocol exactly as written. The hours can be not what one would like and other healthcare professionals can treat you with condescension.
+1 on the lack of respect Clinical Laboratory Scientist receive in comparison to other medical professionals. I am in my second year and my base pay is 50k, though OT/ shift diffs are available anytime I want it. I worked an extra shift a week for a year and made around 65k to finish off the student loans. My job is very repetitive and boring to say the least. I do believe I will be able to work my way into a laboratory equipment sales position due to working with cutting edge technology and developing relationships with these companies. The good thing about CLS is you have already taken most prereqs for med/pharm school if that's the route you want to go with it. Most people see this job as a step-stone profession.

nova1968
Posts: 227
Joined: Wed May 18, 2016 12:00 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by nova1968 » Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:02 pm

WJW wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:36 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:38 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 pm
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:47 am
XtremeSki2001 wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 8:09 am


Accounting, auditing, consulting ... working for a big4 will generally net someone $100k by year 5 or 6 (and often earlier).
+1.

Was just messaged on LinkedIn by a Big4 recruiter for a consulting role at $180k + 25% bonus. 10 years of work experience.
Are you going to take it?
Hello no you couldn’t pay me enough to go back into consulting
Just curious, what is wrong with consulting?
Consulting is like going to Church, you're telling people what they already know.

WJW
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 10:07 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by WJW » Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:30 pm

nova1968 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:02 pm
WJW wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:36 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:38 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 pm
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:47 am


+1.

Was just messaged on LinkedIn by a Big4 recruiter for a consulting role at $180k + 25% bonus. 10 years of work experience.
Are you going to take it?
Hello no you couldn’t pay me enough to go back into consulting
Just curious, what is wrong with consulting?
Consulting is like going to Church, you're telling people what they already know.
I learn something new in Church every Sunday so I still don't get it. I view a consultant as a trusted advisor but maybe we are talking about something different...

chessknt
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:15 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by chessknt » Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:53 pm

triceratop wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:15 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
US Senator Rand Paul graduated from the Duke allopathic program and does not have a bachelors degree. Probably doesn't hurt to have a father who is a congressman. Things have changed since but you already have the UVA program mentioned above.
In the current climate it would take a truly extraordinary act to be considered for any US allo med school without a bachelor's. Just because their website doesn't require it doesn't mean that it functionally isn't a requirement. Uva has a 3% acceptance rate, avg GPA 3.91.

User avatar
munemaker
Posts: 3464
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 6:14 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by munemaker » Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:14 pm

masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:39 am
munemaker wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:19 am
masonstone wrote:
Fri Aug 31, 2018 9:12 am


nurse anesthetist are not RNs they are CRNAs. I'm in medicine I know more than a dozen.
I think they are RNs with additional certifications. Can you be a CRNA without being a RN first? I kind of doubt it.
You need several years of additional schooling, in a program that's hard to get accepted to by RNs. It's like saying a PhD and a Bachelors are the same, just one needs additional years of training. You can doubt it all you want, You are wrong.
CRNAs are RNs:
Before becoming a nurse anesthetist, candidates typically work in acute care settings (e.g., emergency rooms or intensive care units) as registered nurses (RNs) for at least a year. The AANA reports that in order for an RN to become certified in administering aesthetics, they must first complete an accredited program.
Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
I agree completely with that - A registered nurse has to have the anesthetist certification to make the big bucks.

That's what I said all along. The title says it all - CRNA = Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetist. Yes, attaining the certification is a lot of work. Yes the certification program is difficult to get into and it is hard to attain. But that does not mean the CRNA is not a registered nurse because he/she is. So I was not wrong as you stated earlier.

rgs92
Posts: 2168
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:00 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by rgs92 » Tue Sep 04, 2018 9:35 pm

Has anyone here lasted in IT for over 30 years?
Do you know many people who have?

I think the better question is what jobs have staying power.
I do know quite a few teachers and other public employees who seem to be able to stay in the same job (or at least stay continuously employed) for several decades.

Many of the IT employees I know seem to cycle in and out of unemployment once they are over 40. That's the problem. Many have worked in something like 20 or 30 places over their careers, and not by choice. (They do however get lots of lucrative unemployment benefits over the years.)

If you look through LinkedIn, you will see typical resumes with constant churn, where people just stay places for a few years, and the older they get, the job durations shrink and the employment gaps are prevalent.

HEDGEFUNDIE
Posts: 859
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:06 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by HEDGEFUNDIE » Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:34 pm

WJW wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:30 pm
nova1968 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:02 pm
WJW wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:36 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:38 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:03 pm

Are you going to take it?
Hello no you couldn’t pay me enough to go back into consulting
Just curious, what is wrong with consulting?
Consulting is like going to Church, you're telling people what they already know.
I learn something new in Church every Sunday so I still don't get it. I view a consultant as a trusted advisor but maybe we are talking about something different...
The lifestyle is unsustainable. Monday morning 6am flights out, working until midnight while at the client, don’t get home until late Thursday night. Spend the weekend exhausted catching up on sleep. Then Monday morning do it all over again.

Toward the end of my 4 years in consulting, I was completely burnt out and couldn’t give a cr*p any more. One Saturday on a whim I decided to change my Monday morning flight to go to the Cayman Islands for the week, instead of the client site. Took all of my meetings from the beach. I quit a few months after that.

That being said, the work experience did set me up for top MBA school acceptance and F500 strategy work, so it was good for me in the long run. But again, couldn’t pay me enough to go back to that [lack of] lifestyle.

WJW
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 10:07 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by WJW » Wed Sep 05, 2018 6:44 am

HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:34 pm
WJW wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 6:30 pm
nova1968 wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 12:02 pm
WJW wrote:
Mon Sep 03, 2018 7:36 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:38 pm


Hello no you couldn’t pay me enough to go back into consulting
Just curious, what is wrong with consulting?
Consulting is like going to Church, you're telling people what they already know.
I learn something new in Church every Sunday so I still don't get it. I view a consultant as a trusted advisor but maybe we are talking about something different...
The lifestyle is unsustainable. Monday morning 6am flights out, working until midnight while at the client, don’t get home until late Thursday night. Spend the weekend exhausted catching up on sleep. Then Monday morning do it all over again.

Toward the end of my 4 years in consulting, I was completely burnt out and couldn’t give a cr*p any more. One Saturday on a whim I decided to change my Monday morning flight to go to the Cayman Islands for the week, instead of the client site. Took all of my meetings from the beach. I quit a few months after that.

That being said, the work experience did set me up for top MBA school acceptance and F500 strategy work, so it was good for me in the long run. But again, couldn’t pay me enough to go back to that [lack of] lifestyle.
Got it. As a small business owner my whole life it is not something I will ever understand or experience. I plan on doing small and medium sized business consulting when I retire but not at that level...

carguyny
Posts: 316
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2016 4:56 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by carguyny » Wed Sep 05, 2018 7:04 am

I work in funds management - started earning 7 figures in my 30s, current thought is to retire at 45 and just trade for myself.

User avatar
XtremeSki2001
Posts: 1615
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 2:28 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by XtremeSki2001 » Wed Sep 05, 2018 8:06 am

HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Tue Sep 04, 2018 11:34 pm
That being said, the work experience did set me up for top MBA school acceptance and F500 strategy work, so it was good for me in the long run. But again, couldn’t pay me enough to go back to that [lack of] lifestyle.
Agreed on this point. It's worth the sacrifice the first few years of one's career to set up one's career trajectory and future. The experiences, connections, travel, etc. would never have been accumulated in an industry position.
A box of rain will ease the pain and love will see you through

new2bogle
Posts: 1341
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by new2bogle » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:15 am

I will add my support to KyleAAA's assertions - pay really IS that high in tech, especially in Bay Area (where it is needed) and also in Seattle (where it is not needed as much). The FAANG's pay a lot and also make a lot. I have friends in all FAANG companies (except for Netflix - that guy went from Netflix to Google). Netflix had a good pay scheme, it was all cash but had to be competitive with other companies giving out RSUs so they gave out a lot of cash.

A new grad with a Masters in tech in bay area SHOULD be making $150k total comp. MSFT/Amazon outside of bay area will pay that also, easily. Texas salaries (where I am) are a bit lower (which obviously I don't like) even though cost of living is not that significantly lower than Seattle. I was looking to switch jobs earlier in the year (and had a thread about it) where my total comp in TX would be closer to $300k (but did not go through with it for various reasons). I am in my 11th year as an engineer.

It seems unbelievable but doing a good job in tech (you don't need to be a superstar, just good) can earn you more than a lot of doctors (not the specialists). Being below average in tech and you can still lead a good middle class to upper middle class life.

new2bogle
Posts: 1341
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by new2bogle » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:23 am

masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
Not sure about recent times, but in the late 90s one of my sibling's friends went to JHU for undergrad. They had some program there where you could apply for med school in your junior year (i think) and get into med school straight, without completing a bachelors. My sibling's friend did just that and has an MD but no bachelors degree.

stoptothink
Posts: 4405
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:53 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by stoptothink » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:53 am

new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:15 am
I will add my support to KyleAAA's assertions - pay really IS that high in tech, especially in Bay Area (where it is needed) and also in Seattle (where it is not needed as much). The FAANG's pay a lot and also make a lot. I have friends in all FAANG companies (except for Netflix - that guy went from Netflix to Google). Netflix had a good pay scheme, it was all cash but had to be competitive with other companies giving out RSUs so they gave out a lot of cash.

A new grad with a Masters in tech in bay area SHOULD be making $150k total comp. MSFT/Amazon outside of bay area will pay that also, easily. Texas salaries (where I am) are a bit lower (which obviously I don't like) even though cost of living is not that significantly lower than Seattle. I was looking to switch jobs earlier in the year (and had a thread about it) where my total comp in TX would be closer to $300k (but did not go through with it for various reasons). I am in my 11th year as an engineer.

It seems unbelievable but doing a good job in tech (you don't need to be a superstar, just good) can earn you more than a lot of doctors (not the specialists). Being below average in tech and you can still lead a good middle class to upper middle class life.
I don't know about these stated salaries in the major tech sectors (Bay Area, Seattle, etc.), but (in my limited experience), this is the reality:right now the pay in tech is a completely different world than pretty much every industry. My wife works in Data Security (she's in enterprise sales) at smaller firm (~350-400 employees) in Utah County, Utah ("Silicon Slopes). I have a PhD, a director position (technically c-level by title), and (not-so humble brag) am a superstar in my ~4,000 employee company which is one of the largest private companies in the state and the single largest company in the industry. Many of the bottom-of-the-barrel performers at my wife's company (by my wife's judgement), with zero university education (limited professional certifications) and next to no experience generally make more than I do. Granted, people (on this board in particular) are often surprised how little I make for my job title/experience/performance and I know for a fact that I can make more elsewhere (I have been offered more by our largest competitor, but I am not going anywhere for many reasons), but it doesn't begin to account for the discrepancy. One of my work colleagues, actually technically below me (director of digital applications) was lured away from a FAANG; the gentleman appears totally incompetent to everybody in the company and has under-delivered on everything he puts his hands on, had just a few years of experience at a FAANG (not sure what he did there) and a BS in CS, but he makes nearly twice what everyone in my area of the company (science) makes. If we let him go, which the founders of the company (especially my boss) are constantly discussing, they'd likely have to pay someone that is actually capable even more. It is what it is at the moment.

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:20 am

new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:23 am
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
Not sure about recent times, but in the late 90s one of my sibling's friends went to JHU for undergrad. They had some program there where you could apply for med school in your junior year (i think) and get into med school straight, without completing a bachelors. My sibling's friend did just that and has an MD but no bachelors degree.
Things have changed a lot in 30 years. 200 years ago you didn’t need to goto medschool to be a doctor.

new2bogle
Posts: 1341
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by new2bogle » Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am

masonstone wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:20 am
new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:23 am
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
Not sure about recent times, but in the late 90s one of my sibling's friends went to JHU for undergrad. They had some program there where you could apply for med school in your junior year (i think) and get into med school straight, without completing a bachelors. My sibling's friend did just that and has an MD but no bachelors degree.
Things have changed a lot in 30 years. 200 years ago you didn’t need to goto medschool to be a doctor.
I'm pretty sure one had to go to med school in the late 90s to be a doctor. And that was 20 years ago, not 30.

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:27 pm

new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am
masonstone wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:20 am
new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:23 am
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
Not sure about recent times, but in the late 90s one of my sibling's friends went to JHU for undergrad. They had some program there where you could apply for med school in your junior year (i think) and get into med school straight, without completing a bachelors. My sibling's friend did just that and has an MD but no bachelors degree.
Things have changed a lot in 30 years. 200 years ago you didn’t need to goto medschool to be a doctor.
I'm pretty sure one had to go to med school in the late 90s to be a doctor. And that was 20 years ago, not 30.
I was giving an example to how requirements have changed over the years. The further back you go the fewer the requirements to do anything, hence 200 years ago you didn’t have to goto medschool and 20-30 years ago you may have not needed a Bachelors degree to goto medschool.

Kuratz
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:24 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by Kuratz » Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:42 pm

I am a long time lurker but made an account just for this: For the love of God do not go to medical school for the money.

You will spend a minimum of 7 years, once (and if) you get in, working hard and paying roughly $300k to do so. If you want to make more than $200s you can make that 10 years to subspecialize. Thats an insane opportunity cost for anyone but especially someone who is already 26. Additionally the income of physicians is largely dependent on what bureaucrats on the CMS say what our time is worth and will likely decline over the next several decades. If you make inordinate sacrifices you can reasonably make what apparently many tech guys make, but you'll have a minimum quarter-million in student loans and a much shorter career. There are much easier and direct paths to good money for someone with ambition and aptitude. I suggest anything with computers.

However I will say medicine is a great career for those who find it interesting (myself included). Best of luck OP

masonstone
Posts: 139
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:01 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by masonstone » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:29 pm

Kuratz wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:42 pm
I am a long time lurker but made an account just for this: For the love of God do not go to medical school for the money.

You will spend a minimum of 7 years, once (and if) you get in, working hard and paying roughly $300k to do so. If you want to make more than $200s you can make that 10 years to subspecialize. Thats an insane opportunity cost for anyone but especially someone who is already 26. Additionally the income of physicians is largely dependent on what bureaucrats on the CMS say what our time is worth and will likely decline over the next several decades. If you make inordinate sacrifices you can reasonably make what apparently many tech guys make, but you'll have a minimum quarter-million in student loans and a much shorter career. There are much easier and direct paths to good money for someone with ambition and aptitude. I suggest anything with computers.

However I will say medicine is a great career for those who find it interesting (myself included). Best of luck OP
I agree, there are easier ways to make good money for someone who is intelligent and dedicated enough to make it to and through medical school and residency.

stoptothink
Posts: 4405
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 9:53 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by stoptothink » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:44 pm

Kuratz wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:42 pm
I am a long time lurker but made an account just for this: For the love of God do not go to medical school for the money.

You will spend a minimum of 7 years, once (and if) you get in, working hard and paying roughly $300k to do so. If you want to make more than $200s you can make that 10 years to subspecialize. Thats an insane opportunity cost for anyone but especially someone who is already 26. Additionally the income of physicians is largely dependent on what bureaucrats on the CMS say what our time is worth and will likely decline over the next several decades. If you make inordinate sacrifices you can reasonably make what apparently many tech guys make, but you'll have a minimum quarter-million in student loans and a much shorter career. There are much easier and direct paths to good money for someone with ambition and aptitude. I suggest anything with computers.

However I will say medicine is a great career for those who find it interesting (myself included). Best of luck OP
I have two employees (former full-time, still working for me as consultants) who are at Baylor and UT-San Antonio on pretty significant scholarships; significant enough to where both of them should complete their training with <$100k in debt. Interesting thing is that (at least for now) both of them ultimately don't want to practice medicine, they would like to come back and work for my employer doing clinical research (large health products company that is getting into healthcare), which probably will pay even less. If that doesn't work out, medicine is a pretty sweet fall-back.

Then again, these are two brilliant young men who probably have the inherent intellect and work ethic to be successful at anything they choose. I also have two employees currently at Stanford and UT-Southwestern Med, but they actually intend to practice medicine.

international001
Posts: 440
Joined: Thu Feb 15, 2018 7:31 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by international001 » Thu Sep 06, 2018 1:59 pm

Kuratz wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:42 pm
I am a long time lurker but made an account just for this: For the love of God do not go to medical school for the money.

You will spend a minimum of 7 years, once (and if) you get in, working hard and paying roughly $300k to do so. If you want to make more than $200s you can make that 10 years to subspecialize. Thats an insane opportunity cost for anyone but especially someone who is already 26. Additionally the income of physicians is largely dependent on what bureaucrats on the CMS say what our time is worth and will likely decline over the next several decades. If you make inordinate sacrifices you can reasonably make what apparently many tech guys make, but you'll have a minimum quarter-million in student loans and a much shorter career. There are much easier and direct paths to good money for someone with ambition and aptitude. I suggest anything with computers.

However I will say medicine is a great career for those who find it interesting (myself included). Best of luck OP
There is no calculator around to measure the opportunity cost (just in terms of $$) ? And at what other (computer) salary it makes it even?
Average tech guy makes less than $200k. We'd have to compare US averages

travellight
Posts: 2780
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2008 5:52 pm
Location: San Diego

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by travellight » Thu Sep 06, 2018 2:02 pm

masonstone wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 12:27 pm
new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:43 am
masonstone wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 11:20 am
new2bogle wrote:
Wed Sep 05, 2018 9:23 am
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
Not sure about recent times, but in the late 90s one of my sibling's friends went to JHU for undergrad. They had some program there where you could apply for med school in your junior year (i think) and get into med school straight, without completing a bachelors. My sibling's friend did just that and has an MD but no bachelors degree.
Things have changed a lot in 30 years. 200 years ago you didn’t need to goto medschool to be a doctor.
I'm pretty sure one had to go to med school in the late 90s to be a doctor. And that was 20 years ago, not 30.
I was giving an example to how requirements have changed over the years. The further back you go the fewer the requirements to do anything, hence 200 years ago you didn’t have to goto medschool and 20-30 years ago you may have not needed a Bachelors degree to goto medschool.
That program at Hopkins is not a good example. It was a unique program where Hopkins accepted you as a transfer undergrad student and you end up getting a Bachelor's degree from Hopkins with an assurance to continue in their medical school. It's not the same as doing medical school without a Bachelor's degree. Devil is in the details.

bltn
Posts: 184
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2017 9:32 pm

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by bltn » Thu Sep 06, 2018 11:45 pm

Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:59 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 6:50 pm
Rifampin wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 5:54 pm
masonstone wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 4:05 pm
munemaker wrote:
Sat Sep 01, 2018 11:09 pm


CRNAs are RNs:


Reference: https://www.nursepractitionerschools.co ... nesthetist

Actually, CRNA stands for "Certified REGISTERED NURSE Anethesist."

CRNAs are RNs. All RNs are not CRNAs.

The Nurse Anesthetist (CRNA) I know is a RN.
All MDs have Bachelors degrees too. But they can't make a doctor's salary with their Bachelor degree, just as a CRNA can't make their salary with an RN degree.
You are wrong masonstone. Actually there are still some MD programs that will accept applicants without a bachelors degree. Also all CRNAs are RNs with additional schooling. As munemaker pointed out the RN in CRNA does represent a registered nurse with a masters level degree as a nurse anesthetist.
There are no such MD programs that are accredited in the United States. Again I’m not denying that CRNAs have an RN degree in the past just as MDs who graduated from United States have obtained a bachelors degree in the past. If you think I’m wrong please give me one allopathic program in the United States that accepts students without a Bachelors degree or above.
UVA medical school.
https://med.virginia.edu/admissions/app ... uirements/
Website states bachelors is preferred but not required. There are a few more but I think you get the idea. But to answer this thread, yes CRNA is a lucrative field with relatively low tuition cost compared to that of medical school.
Until you can find a UVa Med School graduate who does not have a bachelor s degree from an undergraduate school, I don t believe that requirements document means anything. A med school student without an undergraduate degree would be an extraordinary individual. Let s not hold our breath.

daveydoo
Posts: 1564
Joined: Sun May 15, 2016 1:53 am

Re: Lucrative careers?

Post by daveydoo » Fri Sep 07, 2018 1:36 am

triceratop wrote:
Sun Sep 02, 2018 7:15 pm
US Senator Rand Paul graduated from the Duke allopathic program and does not have a bachelors degree. Probably doesn't hurt to have a father who is a congressman. Things have changed since but you already have the UVA program mentioned above.
This virtually never happens. I don't think one celebrity proves the point that a bachelor's degree is not "required" for med school. :D

UVA is a superb and highly competitive med school. They're all college graduates.

There are a handful of programs that will combine and/or overlap BS and MD education -- several people in my family have done this. But the BS is still awarded before the MD.
"I mean, it's one banana, Michael...what could it cost? Ten dollars?"

Post Reply