Let's talk realistically

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
MD is still probably the most stable, and profitable professional route one can pursue. Only thing that I would say is close/equal in terms of guaranteed compensation is dentistry. What other route can you go and guarantee yourself 200+k income for the rest of your life? And this is the lowest you will be making. Everyone throwing out mid level health jobs such as NP, techs, PA, etc. If you calculate the money a physician will earn over his lifetime versus say an NP the difference is astounding. I.e. lets just do some math, 30 years of working as a mid level specialty in medicine, netting $250,000 for 30 years= $7,500,000. Working 30 years as a PA, netting $80,000 for 30 years=$2,400,000. Hmm take the difference, over the course of a lifetime the doctor makes roughly $5.1 MILLION MORE than the PA. In my eyes, this clearly overcomes the differences in costs of education, and if you are in it for maximizing financial reward medicine is the clear cut winner. You have to look at it long term. When I shadow at the hospital there is a difference in the cars the MD's are driving versus the PA's and NP's, they make more. Medicine is still a great route for one seeking to secure financial stability. So yeah, I guess I would say its "worth it" OP.

You are ignoring a ton of very important differences between the PA and MD route. Off the top of my head, educational debt, time in school, postponing of retirements savings/investments, the time value of money...these things matter and most pre-meds don't even consider them.

Also, you are mistakin if you think 200k is the lowest you could be making.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Are you seriously arguing that it's impossible or even difficult for an attending to live on $50-60k/year for a few years after completion of his residency?

This.

Even if you don't "live like a resident" the first year out so that you can afford moving or expenses you put off throughout medical school and training, there is still ample opportunity to cut back in the 2nd year out of residency. Especially if you are in a dual-income situation. How much do people really need once the big expenses are out of the way! I'm really curious about the expenses that preclude one from living cheaply for a few more years.
 
You are ignoring a ton of very important differences between the PA and MD route. Off the top of my head, educational debt, time in school, postponing of retirements savings/investments, the time value of money...these things matter and most pre-meds don't even consider them.

Also, you are mistakin if you think 200k is the lowest you could be making.

No, I am not "mistaken." At the end of the day the physician route is more lucrative, and it is by a long shot. Not that it should be about the money, because it isn't. But you are mistaken if you think the two provide compensation that is comparative.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
No, I am not "mistaken." At the end of the day the physician route is more lucrative, and it is by a long shot. Not that it should be about the money, because it isn't. But you are mistaken if you think the two provide compensation that is comparative.

Okay, well, if you want to use your extremely rudimentary analysis than the numbers look extremely good. You should know, however, that the gap in lifetime earnings isn't as big as you imply (though I never said that a physician wouldn't come out ahead).

You should go tell all of the physicians making less than 200k that they don't exist.
 
I would go the PA route in a millisecond if it weren't for the fact that one needs thousands of hours of direct patient contact to be competitive. As a nontrad coming from a liberal arts background, I don't have the time to pursue an entry-level role in healthcare, work at it for a few years, and then hope that I get into PA school. I could have gotten into med school by then.

Aside from that requirement, which I would have obviously worked toward had I know about the PA route as an undergrad and pursued it, the entire option is infinitely more appealing to me. No MCAT. A little over two years of schooling, as opposed to 4 years + residency, significantly lower debt with a pretty nice starting salary all the same, microbiology and A&P requirements instead of physics and a second year of organic chemistry. PA applicants also strike me as much less neurotic than med school applicants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Living on a student budget for about 13-17 years sounds a lot easier than it actually is.
You don't need to live on a student budget to quickly pay off your loans, but rather a resident's budget. The average pretax income of an IM physician in my state is 188k, or $124,516.25 after taxes. The average resident lives on around 60k a year in my state before taxes, or $44,393.45 per year after taxes. This leaves you, dropping the cents, with $80,123 a year to throw at loans. $44,393.45 is hardly an austere amount of money to live off of, as it is larger than the average after-tax income of a household (not personal income, household income) in the United States as a whole. If you can bear living like a middle class peasant for 6 years or so post-residency (even less if you have less debt), you can bury your loans with ease. Few people, however, have the willpower to not blow cash when their income rises.

To those of you that say it is impossible to pay off your loans, I leave the following. Don't say you can't pay off your loans, because you can, all while living a fairly normal American life. Rather, acknowledge that you won't pay off your loans because you'd rather buy shiny things to show people how successful you are now that you're a doctor, and you're just pissed you can't buy more shiny things that show off how awesome your life is. I mean, look at ****ing vets- they make around 80k a year after graduation and have a larger overall debt load than physicians, yet they get by just fine. If they can survive on 80k, we sure as hell can survive on more than six figures higher than that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Jesus christ. You have no experience so any argument you bring up is meaningless because you don't know what you're talking about. There are so many little things that eat up your money and at the end of the day you wonder where it all went. I'm not about to list everything that costs money. You've never balanced your checkbook ever so what's the point in taking your calculations seriously? The fact that you're trying to dissect my post and dismiss the points shows that you're totally clueless and missing the forest for the trees. It's not about living comfortably or not. OP is asking if it's worth it. Your salary as a number is not the point here. The number itself compared to what other people make is not what he's asking about. The question is it worth it to go through all that sacrifice? Answer: probably not.
I worked 2 jobs in high school; saved up most of my earnings (~$8500). The day I turned 18 my parents handed me the $6400 they managed to save for my college fund. I've been living in the "real world" ever since. I spent $14,876 on everything not related to school (i.e not tuition/books/fees which are covered strictly by loans) from Jan 1 2013 to Jan 1 2014. That includes all my miscillaneous expenses.

There are tons of little things that eat up your money, but that's why you create a cushion when you can and spend only within your ability. I can't even tell you how many inner-tubes I've had to buy for my bike because some idiot broke a bottle in the street. I have a hand-me-down couch, bed, and TV that aren't going to magically stop working/disappear the day I become resident/doctor. You can almost always opt out of the random little things that eat up money. For instance, I never buy drinks anywhere, just use the water fountain. Don't eat expensive food and don't eat out often - it's not a recommendation, it's fiscally what you are capable of affording.

The difference is that as an attending you will have a MUCH LARGER budget to work with. And this is when it becomes essential to realize what you can actually afford instead of buying things and brushing them off as "random little things that eat up your money."

It's ENTIRELY about living comfortably (from OP):
I don't want to struggle for 8+ years financially just because I'm in debt from my education. I want to be able to live a happy life. Being in constant stress because of debt is the last thing I want to do.
The answer is that it's possible to live comfortable if one plans ahead and understands how to live within his or her means. You'll be making a handsome wage that easily pays off the debt accrued and still can live comfortably. The only financial "sacrifice" I can see is getting started in the game later than alternative professions. This comparison: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/go-into-medicine-for-money.1009560/#post-14101698 shows that unless you are among the most elite, medicine nets a greater lifetime salary than legitimate alternatives (which, to a degree, justifies the large up front costs).

With respect to OP:
How worth it is it to get into the medical field?
Obviously, I'm considering loans and all that, but is it worth it to get that much in debt?
How do people normally afford to do it?
1. The field is and will always be stable and have a high demand for physicians. Furthermore, regardless of trends and the uncertainty of the future, the field will always pay well (imo "well" =6 figures). There are sacrifices to get into medical school, but (imho) financial stability is not one of those sacrifices. As long as you plan ahead and see your options (the financial aid dept will help you with all of this), you can live comfortable and stress-free. However, as is the case with any job, living comfortable and stress-free now means that you aren't maximizing your investments for the future. You can also check out this thread: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/thr...-terms-is-it-worth-it-being-a-doctor.1053078/
2. The debt is managable because of how well the profession pays after you become a doctor.
3. Loans.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Yes, it's still worth it.

Just keep yourself informed with the latest issues that medicine is facing (mid-levels gaining rights, med school debt, cuts..etc.) if you want to keep your salary over $ 150k.
 
Are you seriously arguing that it's impossible or even difficult for an attending to live on $50-60k/year for a few years after completion of his residency?

It depends 100% on WHERE you are living. If you are in the midwest, then yes, it's relatively easy to live on 50-60k (if you are single, of course, and not supporting a family). If you are in a major coastal city, it's much more difficult. You won't be able to save anything. You will probably have to live with a roommate in order to make rent.
 
It depends 100% on WHERE you are living. If you are in the midwest, then yes, it's relatively easy to live on 50-60k (if you are single, of course, and not supporting a family). If you are in a major coastal city, it's much more difficult. You won't be able to save anything. You will probably have to live with a roommate in order to make rent.
$50-60k/year is a comfortable, middle class salary in every city in the US except for like NYC, SF, SD, Washington, and Boston. You can still live in most of those cities if you're ok with commuting from the suburbs or living in downscale apartments within the city. Just pretend you're middle class -- it's that simple.
 
$50-60k/year is a comfortable, middle class salary in every city in the US except for like NYC, SF, SD, Washington, and Boston. You can still live in most of those cities if you're ok with commuting from the suburbs or living in downscale apartments within the city. Just pretend you're middle class -- it's that simple.

commuting costs money. "downscale" is code for hazardous waste site. don't act like it's so easy until you try it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
commuting costs money. "downscale" is code for hazardous waste site. don't act like it's so easy until you try it.
Literally hundreds of thousands of middle class people do it every day, for the duration of their lives.

I'd rather live a 'horrible' middle class life for 3-4 more years after residency than upscale my life and screw myself over with $100-200k of paid interest on a 10-20 year repayment schedule.
 
commuting costs money. "downscale" is code for hazardous waste site. don't act like it's so easy until you try it.

Mass transit costs $2. $4 RT. x 250 workdays = $1000. What's the problem?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Mass transit costs $2. $4 RT. x 250 workdays = $1000. What's the problem?
I don't know if I'd want to take the train or bus to work when I'm working screwed up doctor hours. You could easily afford to buy or lease an economy car on $50-60k/year.
 
I don't know if I'd want to take the train or bus to work when I'm working screwed up doctor hours. You could easily afford to buy or lease an economy car on $50-60k/year.

True, but if you work in NYC or Boston, parking would be a b****. Regardless I was just pointing out to Quinn that commuting cost a lot less than the money saved living in suburbs
 
Mass transit costs $2. $4 RT. x 250 workdays = $1000. What's the problem?

You are assuming you live WITHIN the city limits and can therefore use mass transit. If you can only afford rents in the surrounding suburbs, the cost to commute into the city can exceed $20 per day.
 
You are assuming you live WITHIN the city limits and can therefore use mass transit. If you can only afford rents in the surrounding suburbs, the cost to commute into the city can exceed $20 per day.

Public transit goes beyond city limits. It's entirely possible to live in a suburb with access to mass transit without going broke.
 
Dang. With the types of attitudes I'm reading in this thread, it makes perfect sense why so many doctors seem to literally not get it when their patients can't afford their treatment prescriptions. I mean, I wouldn't think I was being unreasonable asking someone with a high deductible plan to get multiple $2,000 MRIs in a year if my perception were so skewed that I thought $50K was an unlivable wage that most people surpassed.

I would be running through the streets yelling, "I'm rich!!!" if I managed to land a job that paid me $25K at this point. I've been applying to jobs for months, and a large percentage of the job listings I come across are for positions that pay like $200 a week. I'm not talking positions flipping burgers either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
commuting costs money. "downscale" is code for hazardous waste site. don't act like it's so easy until you try it.

I live in one of the most expensive cities in the United States and have never in my life made $50,000. My lifestyle includes vacations in Paris and regular dinners out at nice restaurants. No roommates. I have never lived in a slum or dangerous neighborhood. That is a livable salary in any city (except arguably New York, which is a different beast from all the other "most expensive" US cities).

Title of thread: "Let's talk realistically"
ITT: $60,000 a year is poverty wages!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Dang. With the types of attitudes I'm reading in this thread, it makes perfect sense why so many doctors seem to literally not get it when their patients can't afford their treatment prescriptions. I mean, I wouldn't think I was being unreasonable asking someone with a high deductible plan to get multiple $2,000 MRIs in a year if my perception were so skewed that I thought $50K was an unlivable wage that most people surpassed.

I would be running through the streets yelling, "I'm rich!!!" if I managed to land a job that paid me $25K at this point. I've been applying to jobs for months, and a large percentage of the job listings I come across are for positions that pay like $200 a week. I'm not talking positions flipping burgers either.

What? This argument doesn't make any sense. If I think that 50k is a low wage, of course I would not expect that most patients (many of whom earn under 50K) are able to pay for expensive testing.
 
Depends on the city.

I thought we're talking about Boston, NYC, SF etc? Any city that doesn't have mass transit beyond the city limit is cheap enough to live within the city limits.

Please, give me a couple examples. I'm curious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I thought we're talking about Boston, NYC, SF etc? Any city that doesn't have mass transit beyond the city limit is cheap enough to live within the city limits.

Yes, we're talking about the "most expensive" cities. Mass transit is not available outside city limits in every expensive city. Not sure where your confusion is coming form.
 
Yes, we're talking about the "most expensive" cities. Mass transit is not available outside city limits in every expensive city. Not sure where your confusion is coming form.

My confusion is from where are you getting the idea that a major/most expensive city exist with sky high inner-city rent, cheap suburb rent, yet with only limited mass transit within such city.
 
My confusion is from where are you getting the idea that a city exist with sky high inner-city rent, cheap suburb rent, yet with only limited mass transit.

Well, you just described NYC to a tee. Part of the reason I moved. Boston has similar issues, take a look at the subway map. You people are incredibly arrogant. I have probably lived in more US cities during my life than anyone else on this thread.
 
What? This argument doesn't make any sense. If I think that 50k is a low wage, of course I would not expect that most patients (many of whom earn under 50K) are able to pay for expensive testing.
I mean if I thought that most of my patients surpassed $50K since it seems like a lot of people on this forum don't even recognize that there are a lot of people who make well below that amount. It seems like a good percentage of posters on SDN think making $80K+ is the norm, and anything below is unlivable and uncommon.
 
Well, you just described NYC to a tee. Part of the reason I moved. Boston has similar issues, take a look at the subway map. You people are incredibly arrogant. I have probably lived in more US cities during my life than anyone else on this thread.

http://web.mta.info/maps/submap.html

So, you're saying, within the entire five boroughs that the trains and busses can reach - along with further out regions that regional busses can go, there is not one single area that is relatively safe and affordable with 50-60k salary? Oh please.

http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/rail/

Boston has commuter rail all the way out to Worcester, Lowell, Newburyport, Plymouth and etc. All around 40 miles from the city center. If you have trouble finding housing within a 4000 sq mile area, it's not because the city is too expensive to live, it's you.

EDIT: NYC and Boston is the definition of a city with limited mass transit within it's city limit? :lol:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
http://web.mta.info/maps/submap.html

So, you're saying, within the entire five boroughs that the trains and busses can reach - along with further out regions that regional busses can go, there is not one single area that is relatively safe and affordable with 50-60k salary? Oh please.

http://www.mbta.com/schedules_and_maps/rail/

Boston has commuter rail all the way out to Worcester, Lowell, Newburyport, Plymouth and etc. All around 40 miles from the city center. If you have trouble finding housing within a 4000 sq mile area, it's not because the city is too expensive to live, it's you.

I have a spouse and children. It is incredibly difficult to find a place big enough for all of us, in a relatively safe area. It was especially difficult (read: impossible) in NYC, unless I wanted to pay upwards of 2-3k in rent.

The ignorance on this thread is truly astounding. Please, do not act like you know what you are talking about.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
People live in these cities, with families, on these salaries, all the time. I do somewhat kind of sort of maybe agree that it is tough to do in New York, but not anywhere else and certainly not Boston.

The ignorance on this thread is truly astounding. Please, do not act like you know what you are talking about.

Right back at ya, buddy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
It depends 100% on WHERE you are living. If you are in the midwest, then yes, it's relatively easy to live on 50-60k (if you are single, of course, and not supporting a family). If you are in a major coastal city, it's much more difficult. You won't be able to save anything. You will probably have to live with a roommate in order to make rent.
I have a spouse and children. It is incredibly difficult to find a place big enough for all of us, in a relatively safe area. It was especially difficult (read: impossible) in NYC, unless I wanted to pay upwards of 2-3k in rent.

The ignorance on this thread is truly astounding. Please, do not act like you know what you are talking about.

If you can only find 2-3k rent, then look further outside of the city.

Friend pays <2k in Queens for 2bedrooms. Even at 2k, you won't need to split rent with roommate to make rent and you still have 25k for everything else. You tell me that it's difficult to live on that amount?
 
Last edited:
cool calculations guys they will come in handy when you're actually an attending and realize how naive you were
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Friend pays <2k in Queens for 2bedrooms. Even at 2k, you won't need to split rent with roommate to make rent and you still have 25k for everything else. You tell me that it's difficult to live on that amount?

LOL. Did you forget about that little thing called "tax?" You don't have anywhere near 25k left over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
25k rent, 25k left 10k tax. Did I miss something?

Yes, your tax calculation is extremely low.

Whatever dude. In 4 years, you will be in the real world and have to deal with these issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yes, your tax calculation is extremely low.

Whatever dude. In 4 years, you will be in the real world and have to deal with these issues.

60k - 12k std deduction - 13k exemption = 35k taxable income @ 10% for 18k and 15% for 17k. Comes out to ~4500. You have children, so take 2k from child tax credit, and you liability is 2500. Yea, underestimating it? Sure.

EDIT: plus payroll, state, and city, probably around 12-13k
 
Last edited:
60k - 12k std deduction - 13k exemption = 35k taxable income @ 10% for 18k and 15% for 17k. Comes out to ~4500. You have children, so take 2k from child tax credit, and you liability is 2500. Yea, underestimating it? Sure.

Yea...this is not correct. You are making bare bones calculations. Federal tax, state tax, along with medical, life insurance, etc -- it all adds up to a substantial chunk of your paycheck every month. This is something you clearly have no experience with, and for some reason, you refuse to believe what I'm telling you.

Let's say you make $5000 a month. After taxes, you only take home ~4000 a month (best case scenario). Now AT LEAST half of that will go to rent in an expensive city. That's $2000/month left (best case scenario) for living expenses. What about paying off your loans, saving for your kid's college, etc? It's not like that 2,000 is going to food and alcohol for one person. Remember you won't be a bachelor college student forever.

I'm getting kind of sick of this discussion, so I'm going to leave now. Hopefully, like I said, you will wise up in 4+ years, when you actually LIVE this reality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Yea...this is not correct. You are making bare bones calculations. Federal tax, state tax, along with medical, life insurance, etc -- it all adds up to a substantial chunk of your paycheck every month. This is something you clearly have no experience with, and for some reason, you refuse to believe what I'm telling you.

Let's say you make $5000 a month. After taxes, you only take home ~4000 a month (best case scenario). Now AT LEAST half of that will go to rent in an expensive city. That's $2000/month left (best case scenario) for living expenses. What about paying off your loans, saving for your kid's college, etc? It's not like that 2,000 is going to food and alcohol for one person. Remember you won't be a bachelor college student forever.

I'm getting kind of sick of this discussion, so I'm going to leave now. Hopefully, like I said, you will wise up in 4+ years, when you actually LIVE this reality.

This is what you quoted first:

Are you seriously arguing that it's impossible or even difficult for an attending to live on $50-60k/year for a few years after completion of his residency?
It depends 100% on WHERE you are living. If you are in the midwest, then yes, it's relatively easy to live on 50-60k (if you are single, of course, and not supporting a family). If you are in a major coastal city, it's much more difficult. You won't be able to save anything. You will probably have to live with a roommate in order to make rent.

I think you're forgetting that the we're talking about living like a resident for the first couple years of attending to pay down student loans. Not as a lifelong lifestyle decision. So college savings, retirement, etc is irrelevant here.
 
Yea...this is not correct. You are making bare bones calculations. Federal tax, state tax, along with medical, life insurance, etc -- it all adds up to a substantial chunk of your paycheck every month. This is something you clearly have no experience with, and for some reason, you refuse to believe what I'm telling you.

Let's say you make $5000 a month. After taxes, you only take home ~4000 a month (best case scenario). Now AT LEAST half of that will go to rent in an expensive city. That's $2000/month left (best case scenario) for living expenses. What about paying off your loans, saving for your kid's college, etc? It's not like that 2,000 is going to food and alcohol for one person. Remember you won't be a bachelor college student forever.

I'm getting kind of sick of this discussion, so I'm going to leave now. Hopefully, like I said, you will wise up in 4+ years, when you actually LIVE this reality.

While I think chenzt's numbers are kind of garbage here, I find it absolutely laughable how many people say "Oh you'll see when you're in the real world" and **** like nobody who isn't on the other side of med school has real world experience. Did you know that some people don't even become doctors at all? Many of them even have kids, send them to college, and manage to retire. Shocking, I know!

To the points above,

1. the entire thrust of this argument is that you could temporarily live on 50-60K of your salary while using the rest to pay off your loans and things of that nature, what are you even talking about with that comment?

2. Many people will be bachelors forever. Many people will not have kids even though they choose to marry. Many people will have spouses who work, even if they do have kids (true story!). I hate this "Yeah but then you'll have a wife and four kids to support, how you gonna do that smart guy" BS.

3. You yourself made the claim earlier in this thread that it would be difficult for a single person to live in a city or a family to live in "the midwest" (as if the midwest is a homogenous entity but that's another discussion entirely) on 50-60K; people do this all the time, no roommates, none of that BS, it is just false (PS median household income in the US is ~$45,000, median household income in Boston is ~$60,000).
 
cool calculations guys they will come in handy when you're actually an attending and realize how naive you were
Cool, have fun getting raped up the ass with $100k in interest because, like a child, you couldn't control your base impulses for a few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
While I think chenzt's numbers are kind of garbage here, I find it absolutely laughable how many people say "Oh you'll see when you're in the real world" and **** like nobody who isn't on the other side of med school has real world experience. Did you know that some people don't even become doctors at all? Many of them even have kids, send them to college, and manage to retire. Shocking, I know!

To the points above,

1. the entire thrust of this argument is that you could temporarily live on 50-60K of your salary while using the rest to pay off your loans and things of that nature, what are you even talking about with that comment?

2. Many people will be bachelors forever. Many people will not have kids even though they choose to marry. Many people will have spouses who work, even if they do have kids (true story!). I hate this "Yeah but then you'll have a wife and four kids to support, how you gonna do that smart guy" BS.

3. You yourself made the claim earlier in this thread that it would be difficult for a single person to live in a city or a family to live in "the midwest" (as if the midwest is a homogenous entity but that's another discussion entirely) on 50-60K; people do this all the time, no roommates, none of that BS, it is just false (PS median household income in the US is ~$45,000, median household income in Boston is ~$60,000).

Do you realize how much childcare costs?! If my spouse worked, it would make LESS sense financially. This is true for MANY couples. The cost of childcare in major cities is astronomical.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
@QuinnTheEskimo and @Psai : So, wise and mighty financial experts who are so lived and experienced in your ways, how exactly do you plan on paying off your loans? I guess you'll just wing it and live week to week without planning anything in advance? All the while expecting it to just "work out" (which, mind you, @chenzt and I have pointed out is enirely do-able)?

Thousands upon thousands of people have done it before us - come out of medical school with debt up to their neck - and yet still live comfortably and in fact upper-middle class lives. And we're the naive ones to say that it can be done?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
No they haven't and that's the point. People who came before us had way less in loans and their interest rates were reasonable too. People who graduated a decade or so ago paid less than than half what we are paying and they were able to consolidate at reasonable rates, around 2% or so. They also didn't have the interest compounding during medical school and could defer payments in residency if I recall correctly. I believe this was changed three years ago but I could be wrong about that, don't have time to check. Our current interest rate is 6% and will go up. (this is for the first 40k you borrow and you are almost certain to borrow grad plus loans which have a higher fee and interest rate associated with it). Interest is compounded as soon as you accept the loan (with a hefty fee taken out). Tuition is probably around 35k for state schools and 50k for private schools and increases by ridiculous percentages yearly. These things are all relatively recent phenomena.

How are you so confident when you don't even know what you're talking about? You guys didn't point out anything, just posted a bunch of random numbers pulled out of thin air and shoddy calculations.

Take a look at this graph: http://avillage.web.virginia.edu/iaas/instreports/studat/dd/fees.htm#medicine
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
No they haven't and that's the point. People who came before us had way less in loans and their interest rates were reasonable too. People who graduated a decade or so ago paid less than than half what we are paying and they were able to consolidate at reasonable rates, around 2% or so. They also didn't have the interest compounding during medical school and could defer payments in residency if I recall correctly. I believe this was changed three years ago but I could be wrong about that, don't have time to check. Our current interest rate is 6% and will go up. (this is for the first 40k you borrow and you are almost certain to borrow grad plus loans which have a higher fee and interest rate associated with it). Interest is compounded as soon as you accept the loan (with a hefty fee taken out). Tuition is probably around 35k for state schools and 50k for private schools and increases by ridiculous percentages yearly. These things are all relatively recent phenomena.

How are you so confident when you don't even know what you're talking about? You guys didn't point out anything, just posted a bunch of random numbers pulled out of thin air and shoddy calculations.

Take a look at this graph: http://avillage.web.virginia.edu/iaas/instreports/studat/dd/fees.htm#medicine
$300k in loans isn't insurmountable when we're talking about $4 million in post-tax lifetime earnings.
 
No they haven't and that's the point. People who came before us had way less in loans and their interest rates were reasonable too. People who graduated a decade or so ago paid less than than half what we are paying and they were able to consolidate at reasonable rates, around 2% or so.
Calling us out for numbers pulled out of thin air then citing 2% as the interest rate? They had drastically higher interest rates then we have. http://www.finaid.org/loans/historicalrates.phtml shows how during the 90s only 1 year (1993-94) did Stafford loans have a lower interest rate than today's fixed amount. During 2000-2010, the variable rate for Stafford loans was lower on average, but averaged 4.3% rather than 6.8% - not 2%.
They also didn't have the interest compounding during medical school and could defer payments in residency if I recall correctly. I believe this was changed three years ago but I could be wrong about that, don't have time to check. Our current interest rate is 6% and will go up. (this is for the first 40k you borrow and you are almost certain to borrow grad plus loans which have a higher fee and interest rate associated with it). Interest is compounded as soon as you accept the loan (with a hefty fee taken out).
They did have interest compounding, hence the in-school rate which was different than the fixed rate we have now. They were given forebearance, just like we are - payments are deferred, but the interest is still accrued on the total. The only feasible difference is that older physicians didn't have to take out as large PLUS loans, because if they did, they had even higher interest rates than the 8.5% we have now (on average 8.58% during the 90s and lower, but not as drastic as you are suggesting, 5.83% average from 2000-2010). Sure you could consolidate these loans, but consolidation just means that you're taking all of your loans and making it into 1 amount with an interest rate equal to the weighted average of the individual loans' interest rates.
Tuition is probably around 35k for state schools and 50k for private schools and increases by ridiculous percentages yearly. These things are all relatively recent phenomena.
Take a look at this graph: http://avillage.web.virginia.edu/iaas/instreports/studat/dd/fees.htm#medicine
People were concerned about affording medical school over a decade ago even when things were "easier" as you say. This thread is from 2002: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/can-i-pay-for-med-school-and-survive.52672/ and has a wonderful post about how to reduce your expenditures. And another thread from 2003: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/how-do-you-pay-for-medical-school.110644/. As you so astutely pointed out, tuition rates are skyrocketing, but medical professionals' compensation is also increasing. While physicians' salaries are not holding pace with inflation rates and the consumer price index, AND is far surpassed by the increase in tuition rates, physicians from over a decade ago qualified as the top 5% of earners. Ultimately the huge up front costs just knock physicians from upper class to middle-upper class (200k annual earnings is currently the 94th percentile of earners).

And despite all questioning of the nmbers, programs like IBR and PAYE can be taken advantage of if needed and are actually better alternatives for the lower earning physicians who cannot afford traditional loan repayment. Although frankly I'd rather live poor and pay everything off in the first decade rather than continuing to pay for 2.5 decades.

The fact remains that unweildy amounts of debt can be handled in a systematic fashion to ensure paying it off in a relatively short amount of time (10 years). ITT@chenzt has shown that an average current-day physician making 200k/yr can live comfortably (50-60k) until all the loans are repayed.

You also forgot to propose an alternative to being proactive and forthcoming with your expectations. If the proposed method of repayment (10 years for repayment at 200k/yr salary) seems unreasonable, what alternative is there? or are you saying outright that it can't be done?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I thought we're talking about Boston, NYC, SF etc? Any city that doesn't have mass transit beyond the city limit is cheap enough to live within the city limits.

Please, give me a couple examples. I'm curious.
[/QUOTE]

I live in a suburb of Atlanta and have lived in this area for about 15 years. MARTA ends roughly at I-285 on the east side (my husband had to commute 45 minutes to get to the train when he rode it). The safe spots of Atlanta are far from cheap (Sandy Springs, Druid Hills, Toco Hills for example) and the other places such as near Grady are very dangerous and are still not necessarily cheap unless you are in subsidized housing. The only place we could afford (and that includes when we were looking at places in the city) was in a trailer park in the suburbs. Depending on where you have to be, parking can be up to $20 a day. I used to have to pay $15 a day parking to shadow.
 
I live in a suburb of Atlanta and have lived in this area for about 15 years. MARTA ends roughly at I-285 on the east side (my husband had to commute 45 minutes to get to the train when he rode it). The safe spots of Atlanta are far from cheap (Sandy Springs, Druid Hills, Toco Hills for example) and the other places such as near Grady are very dangerous and are still not necessarily cheap unless you are in subsidized housing. The only place we could afford (and that includes when we were looking at places in the city) was in a trailer park in the suburbs. Depending on where you have to be, parking can be up to $20 a day. I used to have to pay $15 a day parking to shadow.

I did think of Atlanta when I thought of a major city with subpar mass transit.

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/city_result.jsp?country=United States&city=Atlanta, GA

Rent index is 36... where 100 = NYC prices. Obviously you know the city a lot better but I'm still a bit skeptical. 'Safe' is rather subjective and I have no idea how different our definitions are.

I was talking about living with a family income of 50-60k, not sure if that's your situation as well?

Quick scan on craigslist and there are 2bedrooms near emory for ~$1300. A bit pricy but doable for 50-60k income.
 
Last edited:
I did think of Atlanta when I thought of a major city with subpar mass transit.

http://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/city_result.jsp?country=United States&city=Atlanta, GA

Rent index is 36... where 100 = NYC prices. Obviously you know the city a lot better but I'm still a bit skeptical. 'Safe' is rather subjective and I have no idea how different our definitions are.

I was talking about living with a family income of 50-60k, not sure if that's your situation as well?

Quick scan on craigslist and there are 2bedrooms near emory for ~$1300. A bit pricy but doable for 50-60k income.

True, "safe" is subjective... but not many would find the areas around Grady "safe". There's a reason why there are so many GSWs going to that ED.
 
True, "safe" is subjective... but not many would find the areas around Grady "safe". There's a reason why there are so many GSWs going to that ED.

Yes. Wasn't trying to say Grady area is safe. I been to Atlanta so I can definitely agree there. But there are plenty of places that's moderately safe (not the richest suburb but not the ghetto either) and good enough for me but might not be good enough for some others and vise versa.
 
Yes. Wasn't trying to say Grady area is safe. I been to Atlanta so I can definitely agree there. But there are plenty of places that's moderately safe (not the richest suburb but not the ghetto either) and good enough for me but might not be good enough for some others and vise versa.

Oh yeah, I definitely agree. Lol, I don't know why I had to make a point that the area around Grady wasn't safe... sorry! :p

God, if I had to live around there... :scared:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I was talking about living with a family income of 50-60k, not sure if that's your situation as well?

Quick scan on craigslist and there are 2bedrooms near emory for ~$1300. A bit pricy but doable for 50-60k income.

When I moved here, my partner made 45K, that was almost 15 years ago.

I attended Emory for 4 years and worked at Emory for one and still go there regularly, everyone in the apartments near there that I am friends with has at least one or two roommates, sometimes more. One of my friends who is a college professor has either one or two roommates I believe. He lives about 5-10 minutes from Emory in Toco Hills. To be honest, Druid Hills (Toco as well) isn't the safest area but it is expensive because it is near Emory.

1300 per month at $50,000 is 31% of your income just for rent. The remaining 69% has to pay for all your taxes, student loans, health care costs, food, and utility bills and will not go particularly far especially if you have kids.

Since you are really not supposed to go above 20 to 25% of your income for housing, suggesting someone do over 30% is not financially responsible. 25% is about 1050 a month. If you want to spend $1000 a month on rent, you might as well buy a house in the suburbs but you are going to be dealing with our famous Atlanta traffic which you are going to have to deal with anyway even if you live in the city as Marta does not go even remotely close to everywhere.

Grady is in a scary location. I have little sense of fear so when I say a location is not safe, I mean the location is not safe for me who used to work with ex-felons and druggies (this has nothing to do with working at Grady). If I just think it is not safe for kids, I would state not safe for families.
 
Top