Are New Anesthesia Attendings HENRYs or are we Just HENR

[finalpsychyear]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

6-7% mortgage interest only 750k of it tax deductible and not fully tax tax deductible with salt cap.

You are likely paying 35k-45k a year in interest alone

While it depends on everyone financial situation. Say u have 2 million taxable money available readily. Dropping 750k cash to pay off a home makes sense as that still leaves u with 1.25 million taxable money to pay with.

You are immediately giving yourself a guaranteed 10% return on ur cash payment as opposed to risking it on the stock market going up 10% (it’s up 12-15% this year despite all the April turmoil).

Well i must have just been lucky. Had the option in march 2020 when covid crash to buy a house in cash or voo in the low 200s.

Most said i was dumb putting it all in voo.
Its almost a 3x return and the house i was considering is up 50%.

Then in 2023 again dilemma buy house in cash but i went for a few mag 7 stocks and have come out way ahead.

So for me it would have been a bad move but i was only considering houses closer to the salt cap limits.

 

[maxxor]

My healthcare is much more expensive as well. I’m only lucky to hatch into a state loophole where I only pay $180/month with no deductible with florida blue cross/united/aetna huge nationwide network and $20 co pay for the family but that plan goes up to $2000 a month in Jan 1 2026.

Tell me more about this

 

[aneftp]

Well i must have just been lucky. Had the option in march 2020 when covid crash to buy a house in cash or voo in the low 200s.

Most said i was dumb putting it all in voo.
Its almost a 3x return and the house i was considering is up 50%.

Then in 2023 again dilemma buy house in cash but i went for a few mag 7 stocks and have come out way ahead.

So for me it would have been a bad move but i was only considering houses closer to the salt cap limits.

Depends how you play the game

Putting 10% down on a home say worth 500k in 2020 that’s now worth 1 million. We all remember interest rates were 2-3% at that time.

So a 50k downpayment nets you 500k pure profit should u sell the house. That’s a far greater yield than voo gave you.

Now is a different ball game.

 

[aneftp]

Tell me more about this

It’s just a glitch in the part time/per diem w2 state of Florida employees system how they calculate healthcare benefits when you drop down to part time or per diem status. And how they calculate benefits.

I’ve managed to milk it for almost 18 months but gotta figure out healthcare Jan 1 2026. Or just carry cobra for $2000/month and write it off on my s corp for another 18 months.

Because nothing on the exchanges offers what these healthcare benefits give me. I’d be paying $1600-2000 a month on the exchanges for crappy networks for a family of 4. People know how I voice my opposition to the ACA. And for me to think paying cobra for $2000/month is a better option than the ACA exchanges tells you something. The options available on the exchanges are not that great.

 

[Lab Lover]

Depends how you play the game

Putting 10% down on a home say worth 500k in 2020 that’s now worth 1 million. We all remember interest rates were 2-3% at that time.

So a 50k downpayment nets you 500k pure profit should u sell the house. That’s a far greater yield than voo gave you.

Now is a different ball game.

Do you remember how folks who bought Florida real estate in 2006 did?

 

[aneftp]

Do you remember how folks who bought Florida real estate in 2006 did?

Yes! I got screwed. And I lost a ton of money on a home a purchased in 2009 in Florida having moved down here a year earlier. It was like catching a falling knife. Figured I got a decent deal on a home 550K 4/3 bedroom in gated community that was selling for 650K at peak 2006 prices.

Except so many of my neighbors were living on borrowed time. What pissed me off most about the mortgage and forgiveness act of 2007 (extended for 10 years) was it never took into account whether someone took a huge profit selling their homes from 2004-2007. Most of my neighbors "upgraded" in the community. So they all made 200-300K hefty tax free profits selling their homes in 2005/2006. So my neighbors who purchased the same exact home, same floor plan in 2006 for 650k "short sold" their home for 399K in 2011. They weren't the only ones doing that. Like what happened to their 300K tax free profit they made in 2006 from the sale of their home?

Instead of putting those profits into downpayment into their new homes. They put little money down and spent the profits from the sell of their previous homes. We all know what the mortgage and forgiveness act did. Let 50% of people out of mortgage jail for free. Even NBA players making 8 million were short selling their homes. It becomes a complete joke this law. Caused homes to keep falling to 2012 in most parts.

I sold that Florida home in 2012 as I was about to move back up north due to crashing anesthesia Florida market with the invasion of AMC into the area. Lost around 100K on that home in addition to losing 137K on my first home up north I had purchased in 2005 and sold in 2009. Close to 250K in real losses. Never made a penny on housing until the recent run up on home prices.

So yeah. Housing and the scams going on does not leave a good taste in my mouth. Being responsible financially doesn't pay off when everyone is trying to scam the system and make money.

 

[Splenda88]

Yes! I got screwed. And I lost a ton of money on a home a purchased in 2009 in Florida having moved down here a year earlier. It was like catching a falling knife. Figured I got a decent deal on a home 550K 4/3 bedroom in gated community that was selling for 650K at peak 2006 prices.

Except so many of my neighbors were living on borrowed time. What pissed me off most about the mortgage and forgiveness act of 2007 (extended for 10 years) was it never took into account whether someone took a huge profit selling their homes from 2004-2007. Most of my neighbors "upgraded" in the community. So they all made 200-300K hefty tax free profits selling their homes in 2005/2006. So my neighbors who purchased the same exact home, same floor plan in 2006 for 650k "short sold" their home for 399K in 2011. They weren't the only ones doing that. Like what happened to their 300K tax free profit they made in 2006 from the sale of their home?

Instead of putting those profits into downpayment into their new homes. They put little money down and spent the profits from the sell of their previous homes. We all know what the mortgage and forgiveness act did. Let 50% of people out of mortgage jail for free. Even NBA players making 8 million were short selling their homes. It becomes a complete joke this law. Caused homes to keep falling to 2012 in most parts.

I sold that Florida home in 2012 as I was about to move back up north due to crashing anesthesia Florida market with the invasion of AMC into the area. Lost around 100K on that home in addition to losing 137K on my first home up north I had purchased in 2005 and sold in 2009. Close to 250K in real losses. Never made a penny on housing until the recent run up on home prices.

So yeah. Housing and the scams going on does not leave a good taste in my mouth. Being responsible financially doesn't pay off when everyone is trying to scam the system and make money.

Had you waited 2 yrs longer, you could have gotten that house for 300-350k. Anyway, that house probably worth 900k now.

I bought a house in FL in 2011 for 150k and the previous owner paid 350k for and let it go into foreclosure.

 

[aneftp]

Had you waited 2 yrs longer, you could have gotten that house for 300-350k. Anyway, that house probably worth 900k now.

I bought a house in FL in 2011 for 150k and the previous owner paid 350k for and let it go into foreclosure.

correct the same home sells for 900K in 2025. You are right on the money on that.

It's hard to predict. Just got married a year earlier. Rented for 9 months in Florida. The usual spouse wants a home to make into a home. I was fine living in a 2 bedroom apartment paying $900/month rent no kids at the time.

I'm just so annoyed at the mortgage and forgiveness act. The government never really verifies if you are truly poor when letting you escape the 1099-c the banks issue on a short sale or foreclosure. And since Florida is a non re course state, the banks can go after you. But the forgiveness of the 1099-c (cancellation of debt) and not having to deal with the IRS allowed so many people (including my pain friend) making 1 million to not only walk around from one primary home he purchased in 2004 and took out home equity to pay off his student loans but also the beach condo he got in 2006. He short sold both those homes in succession in 2011 and 2012 and basically F'd over the govt 600K in debt. He rented a year and purchased a home in 2013 (like you mentioned) at the bottom of the market with hard cash down 50%).

He would not have been able to pull that stunt if he was dealing with the 600K 1099c from the IRS. No one wants to deal with a 200K tax bill from the IRS. And that's why it was such a horrible law. The nuclear option was always available to distress homeowners....bankruptcy. But the forgiveness allowed tons of homeowners to escape for free.

Ever wonder why no short sales exists or rarely exist before and after the law? It's strictly because of the IRS. No one messes with the IRS.

 

[deleted87051]

Depends how you play the game

Putting 10% down on a home say worth 500k in 2020 that’s now worth 1 million. We all remember interest rates were 2-3% at that time.

So a 50k downpayment nets you 500k pure profit should u sell the house. That’s a far greater yield than voo gave you.

Now is a different ball game.

Do you remember how folks who bought Florida real estate in 2006 did?

The risks and benefits of leverage.

 

[HemeOncHopeful19]

View attachment 408550

View attachment 408551

"Many academic tax experts say increasing enforcement is also an effective cheating deterrent. One study found that for every dollar the I.R.S. collects from an audit, it collects another $3 in the future because the individual will be less likely to dodge paying taxes. Other studies have found that people pay more in taxes when they hear someone else was audited."

Am I the only one that thinks there is an argument that underpaying by $5k on 1-25k of income is worse than underpaying by $100k on $10million?

 

[rowsdower88]

Am I the only one that thinks there is an argument that underpaying by $5k on 1-25k of income is worse than underpaying by $100k on $10million?

Legally worse to underpay $5k on $25k income? No.

Ethically worse to underpay $5k on $25k income? No.

What's your thought process? That the underpayment of $5k is worse because it's a greater percentage of the money that person has control over?

Or that the person who underpaid $100k on $10M is possibly more likely to have done so accidentally?

Depends on what assumptions you want to make there I suppose as well as your ethical framework of choice.

 

[GassYous]

I don't know. I think it is a good move at 7% interest rate.

Ortho probably don't make a lot more than anesthesiologist in this current market. 500-600k vs. 650k-750k is not a huge difference in the grand scheme of thing

All the orthos I know are making 1 mil+ but they have surgicenter ownership or are spine

 

[HemeOncHopeful19]

Legally worse to underpay $5k on $25k income? No.

Ethically worse to underpay $5k on $25k income? No.

What's your thought process? That the underpayment of $5k is worse because it's a greater percentage of the money that person has control over?

Or that the person who underpaid $100k on $10M is possibly more likely to have done so accidentally?

Depends on what assumptions you want to make there I suppose as well as your ethical framework of choice.

I just think underpaying by 20% of your income when you already have the lowest relative tax burden could at least potentially be ethically worse than underpaying by 1% of your income.

I dunno I guess I may have a weird view because I have some small business owner friends that openly brag about their tax fraud so I admittedly have a personal bias.

 

[rowsdower88]

I just think underpaying by 20% of your income when you already have the lowest relative tax burden could at least potentially be ethically worse than underpaying by 1% of your income.

I dunno I guess I may have a weird view because I have some small business owner friends that openly brag about their tax fraud so I admittedly have a personal bias.

Sure, I get the idea. If you want to think of it as just a personal responsibility issue, then yeah, I understand how you would arrive at that conclusion. I think from a utilitarian perspective, the morally worse option is the one which causes the most detriment to society. Which in this case would be the loss of $100k to the common good (entitlements, mutual defense, R&D etc...).

 

[pgg]

Had you waited 2 yrs longer, you could have gotten that house for 300-350k. Anyway, that house probably worth 900k now.

I bought a house in FL in 2011 for 150k and the previous owner paid 350k for and let it go into foreclosure.

We bought a house May of 2006, just before I started residency, minimal down payment, despite misgivings about the direction of the market. We needed a place to live though and renting didn't look promising.

It was indeed underwater for quite a while. It eventually appreciated. We rented it out from 2009 until 2014, when we moved back into it. Lived there another 8 years. We sold it in 2022 for a modest profit.

Certainly not a great investment given the 16 year time frame. But we looked at it as a place to live in, not so much an investment. And eventually it made some money. 15 year mortgage, tenants paid about a third of it, so profit was a little better than the sale price minus (purchase price + interest paid + maint/taxes) would suggest.

Anyway, point being, even buying at the absolute worst possible moment in the last 30+ years, it still worked out OK, because we were in a position to ride it out and wait.

In 2009 we bought a short sale for $270K. Sellers owed $486K on it. It's worth something between $500-600K now. The people who we bought it from would've been fine, if they could've just held on. But they, like so many people buying houses pre-2006, overextended themselves, expecting they could rapidly flip for easy money. Market rent couldn't cover the monthly cash flow on a near-$500K note, and they couldn't keep up.

RE is not a game for the insolvent and impatient.

 

[aneftp]

We bought a house May of 2006, just before I started residency, minimal down payment, despite misgivings about the direction of the market. We needed a place to live though and renting didn't look promising.

It was indeed underwater for quite a while. It eventually appreciated. We rented it out from 2009 until 2014, when we moved back into it. Lived there another 8 years. We sold it in 2022 for a modest profit.

Certainly not a great investment given the 16 year time frame. But we looked at it as a place to live in, not so much an investment. And eventually it made some money. 15 year mortgage, tenants paid about a third of it, so profit was a little better than the sale price minus (purchase price + interest paid + maint/taxes) would suggest.

Anyway, point being, even buying at the absolute worst possible moment in the last 30+ years, it still worked out OK, because we were in a position to ride it out and wait.

In 2009 we bought a short sale for $270K. Sellers owed $486K on it. It's worth something between $500-600K now. The people who we bought it from would've been fine, if they could've just held on. But they, like so many people buying houses pre-2006, overextended themselves, expecting they could rapidly flip for easy money. Market rent couldn't cover the monthly cash flow on a near-$500K note, and they couldn't keep up.

RE is not a game for the insolvent and impatient.

The short sale/forgiveness law was horrible for the housing market. Only prolonged the housing crash.

People should have just declared bankruptcy and no law was needed.

That’s why government actions make markets worst than they really needed. Likely 30-50% of people short selling their homes could afford to hang on to their homes. It’s was ridiculous in Florida. All the homeowners not paying mortgages for 2-4 years, taking vacations spending like crazy without a care in the world while trying to short sale their homes. Yet they paid their hoa fees every quarter. Because hoa can kick homeowners out quickly.

But psychologically if it’s 100k-300k underwater or more. They feel like they will never “make a profit”.

 

[Splenda88]

The short sale/forgiveness law was horrible for the housing market. Only prolonged the housing crash.

People should have just declared bankruptcy and no law was needed.

That’s why government actions make markets worst than they really needed. Likely 30-50% of people short selling their homes could afford to hang on to their homes. It’s was ridiculous in Florida. All the homeowners not paying mortgages for 2-4 years, taking vacations spending like crazy without a care in the world while trying to short sale their homes. Yet they paid their hoa fees every quarter. Because hoa can kick homeowners out quickly.

But psychologically if it’s 100k-300k underwater or more. They feel like they will never “make a profit”.

Was there a program that wiped out people's mortgage during that time?

I remember a LPN/LVN I was working with that had her mortgage wiped out... She actually showed it to me. Maybe that was a clerical error.

 

[aneftp]

Was there a program that wiped out people's mortgage during that time?

I remember a LPN/LVN I was working with that had her mortgage wiped out... She actually showed it to me. Maybe that was a clerical error.

There was so many programs available. Some loan modifications. Some loans refinanced. Some second liens wiped out. Really depends on the second lein holders. As the first lien holders usually got close to their full mortgage owed since most people didn’t put anywhere close to 20% down. Without govt treating lien holders up to 5% first lien holders barely lost any money on any sale. So the second lien holders were the ones who really held the short sales

My colleague also got f’d. Home underwater 200k (finished residency 2007. Purchased home in 2007 with wife young kids). First job didn’t work out. So he had to sell it in 2010. House went into foreclosed and banks went after him. He ended up having to go on a payment plan for 120k over 15 years due to recourse loan.

It really depended on the lender and who they would go after.

 

[PpfSuxTube]

I tell people you either pay now or pay later. I rather pay for a safe environment where I have some control over their education. Its a numbers game and I am happy to pay to give them the best environment to be good adults.

I will have spent right at 700K for 3 kids through HS and easily will top $2M if they go through Grad school. Best money ever spent.

You must live in a shiity area...
Public schools are fine

 

[UscGhost]

You must live in a shiity area...
Public schools are fine

ROI on that education investment is horribly low...unless the public schools are absolutely horrendous.

 

[aneftp]

Sure, I get the idea. If you want to think of it as just a personal responsibility issue, then yeah, I understand how you would arrive at that conclusion. I think from a utilitarian perspective, the morally worse option is the one which causes the most detriment to society. Which in this case would be the loss of $100k to the common good (entitlements, mutual defense, R&D etc...).

Socialism can work but only in the most homogenous societies like Denmark and similar Nordic countries.

But Denmark is a pretty racist country and they hate immigrants. They passed a law wanting to relocate asylum seekers to Rwanda. So trump sending that Maryland asylum seeker to Uganda doesn’t look as bad as Denmark’s official laws in place since 2021.

“Then Copenhagen passed a law in 2021 allowing asylum claims to be processed and refugees to be resettled in partner countries, like Rwanda.

How Denmark's left (not the far right) got tough on immigration - BBC News

Denmark has come under international attention for its tough approach. And its Social Democrat prime minister is leading the charge

www.bbc.com

But this is how counties maintain high standard of living and high taxes.

 

[aneftp]

ROI on that education investment is horribly low...unless the public schools are absolutely horrendous.

100% agree.

 

[Lab Lover]

100% agree.

Disagree. Unless you live in a top public school district.

 

[UscGhost]

Disagree. Unless you live in a top public school district.

There is very little direct correlation between pre college schooling and ultimate employment. Even expensive college and grad school is a poor ROI.

High performers will do well in public schools. Same AP classes, same curriculum, etc.

According to the Department of Education Scorecard, former Ivy League attendees who received federal aid earn a median of about $90,500 a decade after starting school.

Median Income Earned By Ivy League Graduates: Unimpressive At First

One reason why you might want to attend an Ivy League college or similar college is to earn a higher income. As a parent, you hope your child attending an elite university will make them upwardly mobile. A better life is what every parent wants for their kids. And a better life often means having

www.financialsamurai.com

Entirely unimpressive

 

[Account1]

Disagree. Unless you live in a top public school district.

What is the point of a marginally better education in a private school these days? It’s not like they have special knowledge or bettter teaching ideas any more like pre social media times.

Now khan academy is basically scientifically proven as better for teaching children than in person teaching. What’s the point of spending on something that’s free?

 

[Account1]

There is very little direct correlation between pre college schooling and ultimate employment. Even expensive college and grad school is a poor ROI.

High performers will do well in public schools. Same AP classes, same curriculum, etc.

According to the Department of Education Scorecard, former Ivy League attendees who received federal aid earn a median of about $90,500 a decade after starting school.

Median Income Earned By Ivy League Graduates: Unimpressive At First

One reason why you might want to attend an Ivy League college or similar college is to earn a higher income. As a parent, you hope your child attending an elite university will make them upwardly mobile. A better life is what every parent wants for their kids. And a better life often means having

www.financialsamurai.com

Entirely unimpressive

Literally less than the median electrician. Pathetic ROI

 

[Splenda88]

What is the point of a marginally better education in a private school these days? It’s not like they have special knowledge or bettter teaching ideas any more like pre social media times.

Now khan academy is basically scientifically proven as better for teaching children than in person teaching. What’s the point of spending on something that’s free?

As @emergentmd said, he wants his kids to be around people like their family. That is a legit personal benefit

 

[eyeeye_captain]

As @emergentmd said, he wants his kids to be around people like their family. That is a legit personal benefit

Dunno, I’d argue that putting your kid into a homogeneous school stunts them, socially at least, a little overall. Only benefits the parents’ feelings if that’s the primary driver.

 

[anonperson]

What is the point of a marginally better education in a private school these days? It’s not like they have special knowledge or bettter teaching ideas any more like pre social media times.

Now khan academy is basically scientifically proven as better for teaching children than in person teaching. What’s the point of spending on something that’s free?

I don't even think the education is better.

In Southern California, there are several excellent school districts ( Irvine, Walnut, La Canada, San Marino etc) where students are routinely going to UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Cal tech etc.

What other advantage can a private school offer other than a shifty pay to play opportunity, which probably is still happening.

Most of the desire for private schools is for faith based reasons to be honest. I can see that there is some value in that but as a product of the public education system, I thought public schools were fine.

Public schools weren't dangerous and there wasn't any brainwashing etc going on. Of course that all depends on the school district you live in. There for sure are some terrible ones with dangerous environments due to delinquent students but physicians aren't living in those areas.

 

[UscGhost]

Dunno, I’d argue that putting your kid into a homogeneous school stunts them, socially at least, a little overall. Only benefits the parents’ feelings if that’s the primary driver.

Yea. Some those parents prefer their kids to remain socially stunted. Heaven forbid they see a transgender or gay kid on campus...or gasp...read a book with a gay character

No coming back from that

 

[UscGhost]

I don't even think the education is better.

In Southern California, there are several excellent school districts ( Irvine, Walnut, La Canada, San Marino etc) where students are routinely going to UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Cal tech etc.

What other advantage can a private school offer other than a shifty pay to play opportunity, which probably is still happening.

Most of the desire for private schools is for faith based reasons to be honest. I can see that there is some value in that but as a product of the public education system, I thought public schools were fine.

Public schools weren't dangerous and there wasn't any brainwashing etc going on. Of course that all depends on the school district you live in. There for sure are some terrible ones with dangerous environments due to delinquent students but physicians aren't living in those areas.

Vastly more brainwashing occurs at the religious schools. Teaching you which types of people aren't acceptable in society is actually part of the curriculum there.

 

[Account1]

As @emergentmd said, he wants his kids to be around people like their family. That is a legit personal benefit

Take em to church/synagogue/mosque 🤷

2 million dollars worth of benefit? Really?

 

[Account1]

I don't even think the education is better.

In Southern California, there are several excellent school districts ( Irvine, Walnut, La Canada, San Marino etc) where students are routinely going to UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Cal tech etc.

What other advantage can a private school offer other than a shifty pay to play opportunity, which probably is still happening.

Most of the desire for private schools is for faith based reasons to be honest. I can see that there is some value in that but as a product of the public education system, I thought public schools were fine.

Public schools weren't dangerous and there wasn't any brainwashing etc going on. Of course that all depends on the school district you live in. There for sure are some terrible ones with dangerous environments due to delinquent students but physicians aren't living in those areas.

Parochial schools are typically nowhere near the cost of fancy ass prep school

 

[Splenda88]

I don't even think the education is better.

In Southern California, there are several excellent school districts ( Irvine, Walnut, La Canada, San Marino etc) where students are routinely going to UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Cal tech etc.

What other advantage can a private school offer other than a shifty pay to play opportunity, which probably is still happening.

Most of the desire for private schools is for faith based reasons to be honest. I can see that there is some value in that but as a product of the public education system, I thought public schools were fine.

Public schools weren't dangerous and there wasn't any brainwashing etc going on. Of course that all depends on the school district you live in. There for sure are some terrible ones with dangerous environments due to delinquent students but physicians aren't living in those areas.

My spouse wanted us to put the kids in private school, which would have been ~45k (activities included) for 2. I had to use ourselves as examples to reassure her that we don't need to spend that kind of money to 'educate' the kiddos.

We both went to public school that were ok, not great. She is a RN and needless to say I am a MD. We both even did our first two years at a community college.

The ratings of the schools where we live now are 8/10, 8/10 and 7/10. That is good enough for me.

 

[Splenda88]

Take em to church/synagogue/mosque 🤷

2 million dollars worth of benefit? Really?

As a parent, I realize that some people don't think about ROI when putting their kids into a good school. However, the reality it is ultimately ROI no matter how you slice and dice it.

In fact, one my my colleagues realized it after the fact. Two kids 2 yrs apart. He told me he spent 350k for one to do premed at Columbia University and ZERO for the other one to attend a state university (top 5). Both are applying to DO school now and the one that attended the state school has a more competitive application according to him. He said himself 'I don't know why I spent that 350k'

 

[Account1]

As a parent, I realize that some people don't think about ROI when putting their kids into a good school. However, the reality it is ultimately ROI no matter how you slice and dice it.

In fact, one my my colleagues realized it after the fact. Two kids 2 yrs apart. He told me he spent 350k for one to do premed at Columbia University and ZERO for the other one to attend a state university (top 5). Both are applying to DO school now and the one that attended the state school has a more competitive application according to him. He said himself 'I don't why I spent that 350k'

Won’t someone think of the small class sizes 😂

 

[Splenda88]

Won’t someone think of the small class sizes 😂

Well, you always have to keep an open mind when it comes to these things.

One nephrologist that has been in town for 30 yrs told me he had to pull her daughter (now an EM doc) out of the ?best private school in town. I asked him why did he do that. He said I can't explain it but you realize pretty quickly you want your kids to know more than one world. Still don't know what he meant, but I kind of understand. Lol

 

[aneftp]

Kids who can survive public school can survive private school later on.

Kids who are in private school at the beginning do not necessarily survive public school later one. That’s my belief.

The ones in private school are used to smaller class sizes and have trouble adjusting to the real world unless they continue to stay in their bubble (and their parents can continue to subsidize their bubble through adult hood)

 

[amyl]

I am ok not to cash flow, but breaking even is my goal and I am willing to put 20% down if necessary. Also, I am ok with Dallas suburb (20 to 30 mins away from the city proper)

lol with traffic that’s highland park and Lakewood. When I moved there in 2015 than meant Plano - now all of Plano is minimum 45 minutes. Don’t believe what the traffic apps say…. Traffic there is horrid

 

[PpfSuxTube]

Kids who can survive public school can survive private school later on.

Kids who are in private school at the beginning do not necessarily survive public school later one. That’s my belief.

The ones in private school are used to smaller class sizes and have trouble adjusting to the real world unless they continue to stay in their bubble (and their parents can continue to subsidize their bubble through adult hood)

This is one of the issues... you're just keeping them attached to the placenta for decades and some never learn to cope with real life.

Learning the discipline and desire to study without being spoon fed is an education in itself.

A lot of parents think if they just throw money @ a problem that will it but unfortunately thats just not true. You just can't create an Einstein or anything even close. Probably the you can do is offer them a stable home environment, set a good example by reading engaging with them, playing educational games etc. All the rest is just lining some one else's pocket

 

[DesiredMemberName?]

There is very little direct correlation between pre college schooling and ultimate employment. Even expensive college and grad school is a poor ROI.

High performers will do well in public schools. Same AP classes, same curriculum, etc.

According to the Department of Education Scorecard, former Ivy League attendees who received federal aid earn a median of about $90,500 a decade after starting school.

Median Income Earned By Ivy League Graduates: Unimpressive At First

One reason why you might want to attend an Ivy League college or similar college is to earn a higher income. As a parent, you hope your child attending an elite university will make them upwardly mobile. A better life is what every parent wants for their kids. And a better life often means having

www.financialsamurai.com

Entirely unimpressive

This is interesting, but I believe it may not be telling the whole story.

First, as the article mentioned:
“The one big caveat about the median earnings data is that it reflects only students who received federal student aid. Students and families who were able to pay for college without the need for federal financial aid were not included.”

So the students from the wealthiest families with the best connections aren’t included.

Second, one of the big benefits of attending these elite institutions is the opportunity to join the elite social class if you weren’t born into it. All those hot psych/soc majors who bagged a rich one and now are unemployed or work at an art studio for peanuts are dragging down the average.

Third, although most of the kids that go to these schools lie and say they want to save the world (only to gun for consulting or finance once they get in), there are plenty that will pursue career paths that are not highly remunerative (e.g. research, academics, global aid, journalism, the arts, etc.). They often have enough parental or spousal support to still live a comfortable life, but their income will also drag down the averages.

I’m not saying it’s a good ROI, but I think this number is likely misleading.

 

[UscGhost]

This is interesting, but I believe it may not be telling the whole story.

First, as the article mentioned:
“The one big caveat about the median earnings data is that it reflects only students who received federal student aid. Students and families who were able to pay for college without the need for federal financial aid were not included.”

So the students from the wealthiest families with the best connections aren’t included.

Second, one of the big benefits of attending these elite institutions is the opportunity to join the elite social class if you weren’t born into it. All those hot psych/soc majors who bagged a rich one and now are unemployed or work at an art studio for peanuts are dragging down the average.

Third, although most of the kids that go to these schools lie and say they want to save the world (only to gun for consulting or finance once they get in), there are plenty that will pursue career paths that are not highly remunerative (e.g. research, academics, global aid, journalism, the arts, etc.). They often have enough parental or spousal support to still live a comfortable life, but their income will also drag down the averages.

I’m not saying it’s a good ROI, but I think this number is likely misleading.

That doesnt add up though..

If the grad school isnt the deciding factor, and wealth/connections is, then the school doesnt matter

If the big benefit of attending ivy League is to join an elite social class, then clearly that doesnt work as these non elite social classes (the ones that require financial aid?) aren't apparently getting high social status (high paying) jobs

If those folks are pursuing global aid, and the arts then certainly they dont need an expensive overpriced education to do so right?

Rich well connected families will get their kids good jobs regardless.

And this doesn't even consider the excessive cost pf private high school, elementary, etc

Its like sports. Sure, you could enroll your kid in the best academies, with the best coaches and spend 2 million trying to get him into the major leagues. But most likely, he will get beat out by some kid from Cuba who used a piece of cardboard as a glove.

 

[pgg]

You must live in a shiity area...
Public schools are fine

Depends

We put our kids in a private school despite being pretty happy with the teachers and curriculum at the public school. Our kids were doing well, academically.

However there was a large proportion of the student body from a poorer area. Lots of disruptive kids. Bullying and distracting and soaking up a ton of the teachers' time.

I saw those little ****s running amok at school events, and listened to my kids tell me about their days, and we didn't want our kids around them.

I'm a product of public middle and high schools. Private tuition for their high school years was money well spent.

 

[Account1]

This is interesting, but I believe it may not be telling the whole story.

First, as the article mentioned:
“The one big caveat about the median earnings data is that it reflects only students who received federal student aid. Students and families who were able to pay for college without the need for federal financial aid were not included.”

So the students from the wealthiest families with the best connections aren’t included.

Second, one of the big benefits of attending these elite institutions is the opportunity to join the elite social class if you weren’t born into it. All those hot psych/soc majors who bagged a rich one and now are unemployed or work at an art studio for peanuts are dragging down the average.

Third, although most of the kids that go to these schools lie and say they want to save the world (only to gun for consulting or finance once they get in), there are plenty that will pursue career paths that are not highly remunerative (e.g. research, academics, global aid, journalism, the arts, etc.). They often have enough parental or spousal support to still live a comfortable life, but their income will also drag down the averages.

I’m not saying it’s a good ROI, but I think this number is likely misleading.

I’ll throw out that the truly ambitious or intelligent will have no problem reaching their wildest dreams of power and influence.

Connections of the parents and family will trump things in most cases unless you’re truly a savvy person, and that comes from talent and life experience.

As much as he’s hated, JD Vance is the prime example of this. Ambitious enough to want big politics, intelligent and experienced in life enough to persuade people to back him. No one taught him or gunned for him to do anything, he just kind of made it happen.

Sending your kid to private school so they can do biology at Harvard/Ivy and go to state U or DO medical school is a huge waste of time, stress, money, and life satisfaction.

 

[UscGhost]

Depends

We put our kids in a private school despite being pretty happy with the teachers and curriculum at the public school. Our kids were doing well, academically.

However there was a large proportion of the student body from a poorer area. Lots of disruptive kids. Bullying and distracting and soaking up a ton of the teachers' time.

I saw those little ****s running amok at school events, and listened to my kids tell me about their days, and we didn't want our kids around them.

I'm a product of public middle and high schools. Private tuition for their high school years was money well spent.

Yes, depends on the quality of the school and the area.

I would be surprised if the kids were rowdy in AP calculus, regardless of whether its private or public

 

[Account1]

Relevant article just came out in wsj today

“Think of it this way. All college graduates enter a career lottery for a chance at landing in the top 1% of earners. Recent research has found that graduates of top-ranked schools like Harvard or Stanford are 60% more likely to hit that jackpot. Essentially, they get two tickets in the lottery while graduates of public flagship universities get one.”

 

[deleted643396]

What is the point of a marginally better education in a private school these days? It’s not like they have special knowledge or bettter teaching ideas any more like pre social media times.

Now khan academy is basically scientifically proven as better for teaching children than in person teaching. What’s the point of spending on something that’s free?

It’s the equivalent of a Birkin bag. It’s exclusivity.

 

[deleted87051]

Relevant article just came out in wsj today

“Think of it this way. All college graduates enter a career lottery for a chance at landing in the top 1% of earners. Recent research has found that graduates of top-ranked schools like Harvard or Stanford are 60% more likely to hit that jackpot. Essentially, they get two tickets in the lottery while graduates of public flagship universities get one.”

My nephew recently got into this highly competitive lab at Stanford and he feels like it could change his life trajectory. He feels like it is more significant than attending Stanford. But he would never have had the opportunity if he wasn’t already at Stanford. This would be the “2nd ticket”.

Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL)

We at the Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL) tackle fundamental open problems in computer vision research and are intrigued by visual functionalities that give rise to semantically meaningful interpretations of the visual world.

svl.stanford.edu

 

[Account1]

My nephew recently got into this highly competitive lab at Stanford and he feels like it could change his life trajectory. He feels like it is more important than attending Stanford. But he would never have had the opportunity if he wasn’t already at Stanford. This would be the “2nd ticket”.

Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL)

We at the Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL) tackle fundamental open problems in computer vision research and are intrigued by visual functionalities that give rise to semantically meaningful interpretations of the visual world.

svl.stanford.edu

My assumption is that anyone brilliant enough to be highly competitive at Stanford would be found by someone seeking immense talent, regardless of undergraduate or lab affiliation. I’ve seen it dozens of times personally.

 

[deleted643396]

My nephew recently got into this highly competitive lab at Stanford and he feels like it could change his life trajectory. He feels like it is more significant than attending Stanford. But he would never have had the opportunity if he wasn’t already at Stanford. This would be the “2nd ticket”.

Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL)

We at the Stanford Vision and Learning Lab (SVL) tackle fundamental open problems in computer vision research and are intrigued by visual functionalities that give rise to semantically meaningful interpretations of the visual world.

svl.stanford.edu

Connections. The benefit of these institutions is not what you know, but WHO you know. The courses at Harvard aren’t any better than the courses at Community U, but the people you meet at Harvard have the connections to get you that second lottery ticket.