Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills
mac808
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:45 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by mac808 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:59 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:20 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:09 am
Just to pile on, here are just a few non-FANG tech companies’ public disclosures of median employee compensation (as part of the CEO Pay Ratio rule):

Twilio: 222k
Workday: 188k
Box: 181k
Twitter: 173k
Citrix: 170k
Square: 155k
Salesforce: 152k

Remember, not every employee is an engineer (and not every employee is located in the US). If we assume the engineers are at the higher end of all staff pay, then it stands to reason that at all these companies the typical US-based engineer is making well over $200k.
Holy cow, this must be a recent phenomenon. Those numbers are so much higher than they were when I looked into this seriously around 2010.

Possible bubble?
You could make a well-reasoned argument either way as to a bubble in tech. Personally I'm not in the bubble camp. Software is eating the world which just means eating its way through legacy inefficiencies that exist in every industry on earth. Tech platform companies are extremely profitable. They remain extremely talent driven because a majority of their code base is turning over every few years. Your kids and grandkids are statistically spending more time on their devices and the Internet than anywhere else. The shift in human behavior has happened and is fundamental. As a good Boglehead I also hear "this time it's different" whispered in the back of my mind which always cautions me against too much unbridled optimism, though.

JGoneRiding
Posts: 1809
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 3:26 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by JGoneRiding » Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:06 pm

I didn't read 3 pages.

One issue rarely discussed is the very high number of wanta be docs. This is a highly competitive and exhausting field to get into. I can't tell you how many intelligent people I know who couldn't make the cut or took years to get accepted. It may be unfair but rule 1 is you need to test well. No matter what excuses you have gotten away with in the past you won't get into medical school with out good standardized testing skills.

Someone in tech may be "finishing " their career and looking for the second after aging out just as a doc is FINALLY actually starting and making money.

HEDGEFUNDIE
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:06 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by HEDGEFUNDIE » Thu Aug 01, 2019 1:37 pm

mac808 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 12:59 pm
sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 11:20 am
HEDGEFUNDIE wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:09 am
Just to pile on, here are just a few non-FANG tech companies’ public disclosures of median employee compensation (as part of the CEO Pay Ratio rule):

Twilio: 222k
Workday: 188k
Box: 181k
Twitter: 173k
Citrix: 170k
Square: 155k
Salesforce: 152k

Remember, not every employee is an engineer (and not every employee is located in the US). If we assume the engineers are at the higher end of all staff pay, then it stands to reason that at all these companies the typical US-based engineer is making well over $200k.
Holy cow, this must be a recent phenomenon. Those numbers are so much higher than they were when I looked into this seriously around 2010.

Possible bubble?
You could make a well-reasoned argument either way as to a bubble in tech. Personally I'm not in the bubble camp. Software is eating the world which just means eating its way through legacy inefficiencies that exist in every industry on earth. Tech platform companies are extremely profitable. They remain extremely talent driven because a majority of their code base is turning over every few years. Your kids and grandkids are statistically spending more time on their devices and the Internet than anywhere else. The shift in human behavior has happened and is fundamental. As a good Boglehead I also hear "this time it's different" whispered in the back of my mind which always cautions me against too much unbridled optimism, though.
+1. If SW ever “pops” it won’t be because the business fundamentals become exposed like in 2000. The fundamentals are great.

I would suspect it would be because the code gets so advanced it starts writing itself. Fewer engineers needed for new features and maintenance.

sawhorse
Posts: 3463
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 7:05 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by sawhorse » Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:34 pm

HawkeyePierce wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 4:47 am
My experience in this industry just doesn't match yours.

I make $325k at a tech company as a senior software engineer (L5/E5 equivalent at Google/Facebook). If I were to transfer to San Francisco I'd be looking at $400-430k based on what I know about the comp of my counterparts in that office. I come from a no-name liberal arts school in Texas with no graduate degree. I got in the company by running into someone who already worked there at a tech event and asking him to introduce me to a hiring manager—sheer dumb luck.

This industry hires computer science majors fresh out of undergrad by the boatload. Our standard new grad offer is in the $160s. From what I know, Facebook is about the same. Exceedingly few positions are filled by PhDs relative to their total engineering workforce and they won't come in through the new grad track anyways. Outside of research roles in data science, machine learning/AI or skunkworks teams, you just won't find many PhDs.

After all, the numbers just don't add up. There are only about 2000 new computer science PhDs a year[1]. Collectively, Silicon Valley hires far more engineers than that annually—we have hundreds of open engineering positions and we're a small fraction of the size of the FAANG companies. Even if Silicon Valley wanted it's engineer ranks to be populated mostly by PhDs there wouldn't be enough to go around. (Not to mention the fierce competition for such people from Wall Street, who can pay even more)

Very few of the software engineers I work with have anything but a bachelors and several don't even have that. Many have completely unrelated degrees—I work with one woman who has a journalism degree and another engineer with a creative writing degree. My boss's boss went to Redneck State University.

The usual track for a new grad would probably see them break $200k target comp (that is, excluding stock appreciation) in 2-3 years.

I should also be clear that I'm referring to engineering roles (or more broadly EPDR roles: engineering, product, design and research). Roles outside of that are compensated very differently. I'm not surprised to learn that a project manager isn't seeing these comp levels. IME it's not a role Silicon Valley leans on too heavily.

I would ballpark estimate that there are 100k software engineers working for Silicon Valley-level companies. Google alone has 20-30k and the tail is long since any Series B/C startup has at least approach these comp levels to compete for talent. Sure, it's an order of magnitude smaller than the number of doctors in the country but those still aren't bad odds. Not bad at all.

[1] https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf19301/
Wow, when did it get this way? When my husband and I researched it seriously about 10 years ago, the numbers we got definitely weren't in that ballpark, and we knew engineering PhDs that struggled to find jobs in their field. It seems that my viewpoint is outdated.

HawkeyePierce
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:29 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by HawkeyePierce » Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:42 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:34 pm
Wow, when did it get this way? When my husband and I researched it seriously about 10 years ago, the numbers we got definitely weren't in that ballpark, and we knew engineering PhDs that struggled to find jobs in their field. It seems that my viewpoint is outdated.
When the anti-poaching cartel was broken by the DOJ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech ... Litigation

Additionally, Facebook never joined those anti-poaching agreements and gleefully offered big comp packages to attract talent away from those firms. SV couldn't defend their comp levels on two fronts—against both the DOJ and Facebook's deep pockets—so once those agreements crumbled, the mega-cap firms like Google had to match Facebook's offers.

After that the dam broke. Google and Facebook's outsized offers forced everyone else to catch up. 2013-2015 is when things really started heating up.

jayk238
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:02 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by jayk238 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:48 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:37 pm
mac808 wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:24 pm
sawhorse wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 11:13 pm
Cyanide123 wrote:
Tue Jul 30, 2019 4:16 pm
Most medical specialties make between 200-300k after many more years of education and training. A software engineer can hit 200k with just a bachelors.
There is some major overestimation of tech salaries. Most software engineers never hit $200k, and certainly not with only a bachelor's degree. The average software engineer, of all experience levels and all education levels, makes a bit more than $100k. The ones that earn more tend to be in very high cost of living areas. Lots of software engineers make $50-75k. There are very few software engineers in low cost areas making $200k whereas there are very few physicians in low cost areas making less than that. Indeed, physicians in those areas can make more than if they lived in a high cost coastal city.
The intellectual bar to becoming a physician is higher and there are fewer physicians as a result. If you took an individual with enough aptitude to choose either career path, they would make more in tech in the vast majority of cases. I think that’s the fairest comparison.
Okay, let's look at the closest intellectual comparison then: biochemistry PhDs. Pretty much anyone with the intellect and work ethic to become a biochemistry PhD also has the intellect and work ethic to become a physician. In fact, I'd say the opposite is not true. My husband's brother is a doctor and applied to medical school after not being accepted to any of the PhD programs he applied to. He's in another country though, and I don't know what medical school and PhD admissions are like there. Academically my husband was a better student, but they were both good students.

My husband has a PhD during which he regularly worked 60+ hours a week and slept overnight in the lab at least once a week, waking up every few hours to monitor the experiments (sound familiar?). He did 7 years of post-docs, and now makes $130k after 5 years in a very high cost area albeit without student debt. Do you know what a 7th year post-doc at a major cancer center earns? $55k. Modern medicine wouldn't exist without the research they do. A Nobel Prize winner in chemistry, who has made major contributions to medicine, earns $218k as a biochemistry professor. Total income is around $300k with other sources of income (mostly speaking engagements and a high level book that sells few copies). For a Nobel Prize winner.

My point is, even controlling for intellectual rigor, medicine is incredibly lucrative despite what many physicians on this board try to claim. However, it takes a certain personality, and it's certainly not right for everyone of equal intelligence and work ethic. My husband is very introverted and hates conflict. He wouldn't be able to deal with all the crap you have to go through with your ER patients. He is a lot happier at his job making a third of the money that you do.

I feel a lot of physicians go into medicine for the money because they overestimate the degree that money will make them happy and overestimate the ability of money to compensate for a personality mismatch.
You know, its funny, i only ever hear such gripes about doctors from PhDs or their family. Getting a biochemistry PhD is as easy as getting a PhD in anything else. Schools everywhere hand them out like candy and the entry requirements are generally much lower.
I think its funny that they make these dramatic statements because the reality is the opposite.

Getting a Phd is a dime a dozen.

When I looked at entrance requirements for phd at my university vs med school the requirements were lower. 3.5 for phd 3.8 was the avg for med school class.

When I was in medical school and doing research the Biochemistry professor and I got to talking about our life choices. He told me how he tried and struggled with the MCAT but preferred research anyway as it was les rigid and structured and more dependent on his own grant writing ability.

Doctors dont go into it for the money. Not one student classmate of mine goes into it thinking about the money.

As a resident my life was so grueling that I had burnout and depression. Theres no financial compensation for that.

The people most upset and doctors salaries are PhDs and Engineers who struggle with their own success. I never understood this.

sawhorse
Posts: 3463
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 7:05 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by sawhorse » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:00 pm

HawkeyePierce wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:42 pm
sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:34 pm
Wow, when did it get this way? When my husband and I researched it seriously about 10 years ago, the numbers we got definitely weren't in that ballpark, and we knew engineering PhDs that struggled to find jobs in their field. It seems that my viewpoint is outdated.
When the anti-poaching cartel was broken by the DOJ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech ... Litigation

Additionally, Facebook never joined those anti-poaching agreements and gleefully offered big comp packages to attract talent away from those firms. SV couldn't defend their comp levels on two fronts—against both the DOJ and Facebook's deep pockets—so once those agreements crumbled, the mega-cap firms like Google had to match Facebook's offers.

After that the dam broke. Google and Facebook's outsized offers forced everyone else to catch up. 2013-2015 is when things really started heating up.
Do you know if they are interested in biochemistry PhDs with a strong engineering background that includes a lot of coding? My husband loves his job, but he's been at 130k for several years, and the company doesn't seem to be progressing that well as a startup business. They recently hired a PhD research scientist at $85k, so he thinks they may be running out of money.

HawkeyePierce
Posts: 742
Joined: Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:29 pm
Location: Colorado

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by HawkeyePierce » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:04 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:00 pm
HawkeyePierce wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:42 pm
sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:34 pm
Wow, when did it get this way? When my husband and I researched it seriously about 10 years ago, the numbers we got definitely weren't in that ballpark, and we knew engineering PhDs that struggled to find jobs in their field. It seems that my viewpoint is outdated.
When the anti-poaching cartel was broken by the DOJ: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech ... Litigation

Additionally, Facebook never joined those anti-poaching agreements and gleefully offered big comp packages to attract talent away from those firms. SV couldn't defend their comp levels on two fronts—against both the DOJ and Facebook's deep pockets—so once those agreements crumbled, the mega-cap firms like Google had to match Facebook's offers.

After that the dam broke. Google and Facebook's outsized offers forced everyone else to catch up. 2013-2015 is when things really started heating up.
Do you know if they are interested in biochemistry PhDs with a strong engineering background that includes a lot of coding? My husband loves his job, but he's been at 130k for several years, and the company doesn't seem to be progressing that well as a startup business. They recently hired a PhD research scientist at $85k, so he thinks they may be running out of money.
He might be a good fit as a data scientist but that role is so new it’s highly dependent on the individual company. IME it gets a lot of refugee PhDs from the hard sciences though.

User avatar
climber2020
Posts: 1223
Joined: Sun Mar 25, 2012 8:06 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by climber2020 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:22 pm

jayk238 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:48 pm
Doctors dont go into it for the money. Not one student classmate of mine goes into it thinking about the money.
Yeah we do. I'd estimate that at least half my med school class was in it primarily for monetary purposes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. There's nothing special about doctors: we have the same fundamental motivations as everyone else.

The phrase "medicine is a calling" keeps coming up. That may be true for some people, but there are plenty others like me who live very happy lives and enjoy the work and patient interactions, but in the end it's just a day job. Most people don't have "a calling" and that's okay. There's not a single thing in the world that I would be happy doing 60 hours a week into my old age; some of us just aren't built that way.

flyingaway
Posts: 2540
Joined: Fri Jan 17, 2014 10:19 am

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by flyingaway » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:23 pm

Anyone wants to retire early should get a basic tech (CS) degree and get to work as soon as possible.
The person might have retired before the medicine person gets to his first formal job.

DesertDiva
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:49 pm
Location: In the desert

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by DesertDiva » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:29 pm

greg24 wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:35 pm
The only worthwhile point of debate on this is that mom needs to back off.
Absolutely. She can still be proud of her son if he chooses a different career path. There are plenty of well-paying and honorable careers out there.

sawhorse
Posts: 3463
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 7:05 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by sawhorse » Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:41 pm

DesertDiva wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:29 pm
greg24 wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:35 pm
The only worthwhile point of debate on this is that mom needs to back off.
Absolutely. She can still be proud of her son if he chooses a different career path. There are plenty of well-paying and honorable careers out there.
A lot of physicians went into medicine at least in part due to perceived or real parental pressure. In my parents' social circle made up primarily of immigrants, kids are pressured from childhood to go into medicine.

One of my cousins went into medicine in significant part due to parental pressure. He had always been good at science but never liked science. He has been a jerk his entire life. I've never seen even the slightest hint of an altruistic tendency. He complains about his job all the time.

His mother doesn't care that he's been unhappy his entire career, she just loves to brag that her son is a doctor.

A huge career commitment like medicine has to be done because YOU want to, not because your parents want you to. There are a lot of parents who don't understand that.

MoneyMarathon
Posts: 556
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 3:38 am

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by MoneyMarathon » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:04 pm

Bill McNeal wrote:
Tue Jul 30, 2019 2:24 am
She wants him to become a doctor, but he prefers an easier path to make money, and is considering going into coding/software instead. He hopes to work for a FAANGM, enticed by the massive comp packages for new graduates.
By the way, it's possible that he should neither go into tech or medicine.

I read the above as the boy framing what he wants to do in a way he thinks his mom might accept, not that the boy cynically just chose whatever he thought was easiest and best paying. But some people do just go for perceived high pay or easiness. That doesn't really work out, the high pay generally goes to the people who plug away at it for fun and wouldn't even need mega salary to work in the field. Doing anything only for money usually leads to burnout. Best case scenario is that this third hand tale misrepresents what the kid is thinking, but if not, then there should be more focus on what the student is good at & enjoys, less on just what money they could get. Income isn't everything.

DesertDiva
Posts: 639
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2018 12:49 pm
Location: In the desert

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by DesertDiva » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:15 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:41 pm
DesertDiva wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:29 pm
greg24 wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:35 pm
The only worthwhile point of debate on this is that mom needs to back off.
Absolutely. She can still be proud of her son if he chooses a different career path. There are plenty of well-paying and honorable careers out there.
A lot of physicians went into medicine at least in part due to perceived or real parental pressure. In my parents' social circle made up primarily of immigrants, kids are pressured from childhood to go into medicine.

One of my cousins went into medicine in significant part due to parental pressure. He had always been good at science but never liked science. He has been a jerk his entire life. I've never seen even the slightest hint of an altruistic tendency. He complains about his job all the time.

His mother doesn't care that he's been unhappy his entire career, she just loves to brag that her son is a doctor.

A huge career commitment like medicine has to be done because YOU want to, not because your parents want you to. There are a lot of parents who don't understand that.
+1 That's right. Parents often have aspirations for their kids, but aren't the ones who have to live with the consequences.

HEDGEFUNDIE
Posts: 3682
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 2:06 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by HEDGEFUNDIE » Thu Aug 01, 2019 7:22 pm

sawhorse wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:41 pm
DesertDiva wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:29 pm
greg24 wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 1:35 pm
The only worthwhile point of debate on this is that mom needs to back off.
Absolutely. She can still be proud of her son if he chooses a different career path. There are plenty of well-paying and honorable careers out there.
A lot of physicians went into medicine at least in part due to perceived or real parental pressure. In my parents' social circle made up primarily of immigrants, kids are pressured from childhood to go into medicine.

One of my cousins went into medicine in significant part due to parental pressure. He had always been good at science but never liked science. He has been a jerk his entire life. I've never seen even the slightest hint of an altruistic tendency. He complains about his job all the time.

His mother doesn't care that he's been unhappy his entire career, she just loves to brag that her son is a doctor.

A huge career commitment like medicine has to be done because YOU want to, not because your parents want you to. There are a lot of parents who don't understand that.
At a certain point adults need to start taking ownership for their own life paths and stop blaming mom.

jayk238
Posts: 612
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2017 1:02 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by jayk238 » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:30 pm

climber2020 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 6:22 pm
jayk238 wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 5:48 pm
Doctors dont go into it for the money. Not one student classmate of mine goes into it thinking about the money.
Yeah we do. I'd estimate that at least half my med school class was in it primarily for monetary purposes. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. There's nothing special about doctors: we have the same fundamental motivations as everyone else.

The phrase "medicine is a calling" keeps coming up. That may be true for some people, but there are plenty others like me who live very happy lives and enjoy the work and patient interactions, but in the end it's just a day job. Most people don't have "a calling" and that's okay. There's not a single thing in the world that I would be happy doing 60 hours a week into my old age; some of us just aren't built that way.
I dont know what field you are in but its not a day job for me. I live and breathe this job and i give it 110%. Im happy with the long hours and it makes me content.

However, pay me less and i probably will see it like a day job.

JPM
Posts: 84
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2018 2:29 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by JPM » Thu Aug 01, 2019 8:55 pm

I am familiar with a family of intelligent people with SAT scores 1300-1500 range, maybe some a little higher. They are finance, legal, and medical professionals. One of the finance pros recruited for his NYC investment bank among STEM grads. The ability to do statistical math rapidly in your head is an important skill in poker and in trading financial instruments so recruiting targets were math, physics, and engineering majors from top undergrad schools. Many of his recruits hired 15-20 years ago have had successful careers in finance and banking on the strength of their engineering or physics backgrounds. The finance pros make an order or two of magnitude (10-100x) larger incomes at peak career compared to the legal and medical professionals. If you have a high IQ STEM talented kid, finance professions are looking for that kind of kid. They earn a lot more than doctors, software engineers, or most others.

Among my high school classmates (class of '66) the richest are the finance pros and the electrical engineers who got in on the ground floor of the tech and communications revolutions. They left the docs and lawyers far behind, but they were in the right place for our time.I don't know anyone who decided to study electrical engineering in 1966 because he/she thought it would make him/her a centimillionaire. It just turned out that way.

TheNightsToCome
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by TheNightsToCome » Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:12 pm

unclescrooge wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:04 pm
TheNightsToCome wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:15 pm
I had another career, albeit not in tech, and it was a breeze. I was an equity analyst. It was engaging work with no stress and interesting colleagues.

Life as a cardiologist is an order of magnitude more stressful and exhausting.
So why did you quit? If it was all peaches and cream it wouldn't make sense to quit.

Are you sure you're not just feeling nostalgia for your younger, carefree years, when you happened to be an equity analyst?

I'm sure if you have stayed there another decade and had become a portfolio manager your level of stress would've been much higher.
I wasn't young and carefree, I was mid-40s. I left critical care due to severe burnout, and after a year traveling, surfing, diving, and skiing I did a cardiology fellowship. Life as a cardiologist was even worse than life as an intensivist, so I left with no plan.

After several years teaching myself accounting, finance, and equity valuation I became a healthcare equity analyst. It was fun and relaxing. I could read and study and write in peace -- no beeper, no crashing patients, no constant interruptions -- and finally, I could sleep through the night.

During my first year our coverage universe tripled overnight because of Spitzer's settlement with the banks. We were working 12-14 hours for about 6 months before things settled down. Most of my colleagues moaned and raised hell about the crush, but to me it was nothing. The pace of work was relaxed and comfortable, so unlike the drinking-from-a-firehose life I left behind.

As time went on my manager encouraged me to take some vacation, but that just made me smile. I felt like I had been on a great vacation ever since I quit medicine. I was never tired, never burned out.

I eventually left to get an MBA. After the MBA I set up a solo RIA. I would have remained in financial services but I became critically ill with an uncommon disorder. I was misdiagnosed by a cardiologist and my training saved me much morbidity and probably my life.

After that I wanted to be back on the inside, connected again. I have managed to negotiate changes to my current position that make it much better than my earlier experiences. I don't take night call and that is a life saver. However, I'm still drinking from a firehose for about 11 hours a day, plus every fourth Saturday. The pace is intense, and the responsibility and liability are a huge burden.

I would like to continue this if I could simply work at a more reasonable pace, but it's more likely that I'll be forced into call again by the new administration when my current contract expires.

OnTrack
Posts: 538
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:16 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by OnTrack » Fri Aug 02, 2019 12:38 am

Here is a 2015 214 Page report from Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce on The Economic Value of College Majors.

https://1gyhoq479ufd3yna29x7ubjn-wpengi ... -FINAL.pdf

User avatar
unclescrooge
Posts: 3984
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by unclescrooge » Fri Aug 02, 2019 1:41 am

TheNightsToCome wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:12 pm
unclescrooge wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:04 pm
TheNightsToCome wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:15 pm
I had another career, albeit not in tech, and it was a breeze. I was an equity analyst. It was engaging work with no stress and interesting colleagues.

Life as a cardiologist is an order of magnitude more stressful and exhausting.
So why did you quit? If it was all peaches and cream it wouldn't make sense to quit.

Are you sure you're not just feeling nostalgia for your younger, carefree years, when you happened to be an equity analyst?

I'm sure if you have stayed there another decade and had become a portfolio manager your level of stress would've been much higher.
I wasn't young and carefree, I was mid-40s. I left critical care due to severe burnout, and after a year traveling, surfing, diving, and skiing I did a cardiology fellowship. Life as a cardiologist was even worse than life as an intensivist, so I left with no plan.

After several years teaching myself accounting, finance, and equity valuation I became a healthcare equity analyst. It was fun and relaxing. I could read and study and write in peace -- no beeper, no crashing patients, no constant interruptions -- and finally, I could sleep through the night.

During my first year our coverage universe tripled overnight because of Spitzer's settlement with the banks. We were working 12-14 hours for about 6 months before things settled down. Most of my colleagues moaned and raised hell about the crush, but to me it was nothing. The pace of work was relaxed and comfortable, so unlike the drinking-from-a-firehose life I left behind.

As time went on my manager encouraged me to take some vacation, but that just made me smile. I felt like I had been on a great vacation ever since I quit medicine. I was never tired, never burned out.

I eventually left to get an MBA. After the MBA I set up a solo RIA. I would have remained in financial services but I became critically ill with an uncommon disorder. I was misdiagnosed by a cardiologist and my training saved me much morbidity and probably my life.

After that I wanted to be back on the inside, connected again. I have managed to negotiate changes to my current position that make it much better than my earlier experiences. I don't take night call and that is a life saver. However, I'm still drinking from a firehose for about 11 hours a day, plus every fourth Saturday. The pace is intense, and the responsibility and liability are a huge burden.

I would like to continue this if I could simply work at a more reasonable pace, but it's more likely that I'll be forced into call again by the new administration when my current contract expires.
This is a most uncommon career path. Thanks for sharing.

Could still run your solo RIA if you wanted too? Did it pay as well as your physician job?

TheNightsToCome
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by TheNightsToCome » Fri Aug 02, 2019 6:35 pm

unclescrooge wrote:
Fri Aug 02, 2019 1:41 am
TheNightsToCome wrote:
Thu Aug 01, 2019 9:12 pm
unclescrooge wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 10:04 pm
TheNightsToCome wrote:
Wed Jul 31, 2019 9:15 pm
I had another career, albeit not in tech, and it was a breeze. I was an equity analyst. It was engaging work with no stress and interesting colleagues.

Life as a cardiologist is an order of magnitude more stressful and exhausting.
So why did you quit? If it was all peaches and cream it wouldn't make sense to quit.

Are you sure you're not just feeling nostalgia for your younger, carefree years, when you happened to be an equity analyst?

I'm sure if you have stayed there another decade and had become a portfolio manager your level of stress would've been much higher.
I wasn't young and carefree, I was mid-40s. I left critical care due to severe burnout, and after a year traveling, surfing, diving, and skiing I did a cardiology fellowship. Life as a cardiologist was even worse than life as an intensivist, so I left with no plan.

After several years teaching myself accounting, finance, and equity valuation I became a healthcare equity analyst. It was fun and relaxing. I could read and study and write in peace -- no beeper, no crashing patients, no constant interruptions -- and finally, I could sleep through the night.

During my first year our coverage universe tripled overnight because of Spitzer's settlement with the banks. We were working 12-14 hours for about 6 months before things settled down. Most of my colleagues moaned and raised hell about the crush, but to me it was nothing. The pace of work was relaxed and comfortable, so unlike the drinking-from-a-firehose life I left behind.

As time went on my manager encouraged me to take some vacation, but that just made me smile. I felt like I had been on a great vacation ever since I quit medicine. I was never tired, never burned out.

I eventually left to get an MBA. After the MBA I set up a solo RIA. I would have remained in financial services but I became critically ill with an uncommon disorder. I was misdiagnosed by a cardiologist and my training saved me much morbidity and probably my life.

After that I wanted to be back on the inside, connected again. I have managed to negotiate changes to my current position that make it much better than my earlier experiences. I don't take night call and that is a life saver. However, I'm still drinking from a firehose for about 11 hours a day, plus every fourth Saturday. The pace is intense, and the responsibility and liability are a huge burden.

I would like to continue this if I could simply work at a more reasonable pace, but it's more likely that I'll be forced into call again by the new administration when my current contract expires.
This is a most uncommon career path. Thanks for sharing.

Could still run your solo RIA if you wanted too? Did it pay as well as your physician job?
"Could still run your solo RIA if you wanted too? Did it pay as well as your physician job?"

I could open an RIA again, but not while working as a physician. I don't have the extra time or energy. I might do it again after I retire from medicine for good.

My earnings are much higher as a physician. If I had accepted the offer from a major bank to become a healthcare equity analyst at their NY office 15 years ago, then I might be earning more by now. The senior analyst in the pharma group earned several million per year at that time.

User avatar
unclescrooge
Posts: 3984
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 7:00 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by unclescrooge » Fri Aug 02, 2019 6:52 pm

TheNightsToCome wrote:
Fri Aug 02, 2019 6:35 pm
"Could still run your solo RIA if you wanted too? Did it pay as well as your physician job?"

I could open an RIA again, but not while working as a physician. I don't have the extra time or energy. I might do it again after I retire from medicine for good.

My earnings are much higher as a physician. If I had accepted the offer from a major bank to become a healthcare equity analyst at their NY office 15 years ago, then I might be earning more by now. The senior analyst in the pharma group earned several million per year at that time.
Was he able to keep his job in 2008?

Whatever you say about medicine, you can't beat it's job security!

TheNightsToCome
Posts: 452
Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2017 11:48 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by TheNightsToCome » Fri Aug 02, 2019 9:38 pm

unclescrooge wrote:
Fri Aug 02, 2019 6:52 pm
TheNightsToCome wrote:
Fri Aug 02, 2019 6:35 pm
"Could still run your solo RIA if you wanted too? Did it pay as well as your physician job?"

I could open an RIA again, but not while working as a physician. I don't have the extra time or energy. I might do it again after I retire from medicine for good.

My earnings are much higher as a physician. If I had accepted the offer from a major bank to become a healthcare equity analyst at their NY office 15 years ago, then I might be earning more by now. The senior analyst in the pharma group earned several million per year at that time.
Was he able to keep his job in 2008?

Whatever you say about medicine, you can't beat it's job security!
"Was he able to keep his job in 2008?"

Don't know what happened there in 2008, but I doubt it was all good.

"Whatever you say about medicine, you can't beat it's job security!"

Yep. Job security isn't perfect, but career security is just about there.

ncbill
Posts: 598
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2008 4:03 pm
Location: Western NC

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by ncbill » Fri Aug 02, 2019 9:39 pm

Sometimes medicine is a job...at least at first.

Years ago I had a relative with a disabled spouse & several kids whose job wasn't sufficient to support them, but it kept him outdoors & in excellent physical shape, so even though he was in his mid-30s the military was willing to send him through medical school.

He trained in a lucrative speciality, spent years overseas using those skills, then retired as an O-5, now in civilian practice.

afan
Posts: 4408
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 4:01 pm

Re: Bloomberg: Forget Tech, Medicine Still Pays More

Post by afan » Sat Aug 03, 2019 10:14 am

People who do not get residencies tend to have major black marks on their records. For some this is simply terrible performance in medical school. At some places it is possible to graduate with so little skills and knowledge that no one really considers you ready to enter training. For others it is the inability to pass the required exams to get a training license.

Then there is a group with some sort of conduct problem in medical school. Drug abuse rules one out. No training program will take a chance on someone on drugs.

Some have bad psychiatric problems. Depression is common among med students and most go on to successful careers. But it can be so bad as to make someone not functional. It is possible to limp along, maybe taking more than 4 years, and eventually graduate but to represent too high a risk.

Legal problems can also rule someone out.

The less desirable slots in less desirable locations cannot afford to be choosy. At some point a program is better off with an empty position than someone who is not ready to be a trainee anywhere.

I do feel sorry for these people. Often it is not a matter of "working harder" in medical school. Life and illnesses get in the way.

There is a much smaller group of people who do fine in school but make bad decisions when they try to match. I knew a student who had done very well in a top school. Decided on a specialty that is not crazy hard to get into. Should have had no problem. But applied ONLY to about 5 programs, all of which were in the top handful in the country. No match. Got into a good program in the SOAP. You also see this among, for example, excellent students who only apply to the top 6 neurosurgery programs. No one is so great that a move like that is smart.

The unemployable group still have their massive debt, they just have no path to a career that is likely to enable them to pay it. So, yeah, I feel sorry for them.
We don't know how to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, and we don't know anyone that does know either | --Swedroe | We assume that markets are efficient, that prices are right | --Fama

Post Reply