Don't you think it's time medschools start lowering tuition?

[sirus_virus]

---

Members do not see this ad.

In the last 10 years, physician income has declined by ~7%, but the average indebtedness of graduating medstudents has risen by ~28%. I don't know about you guys, but I think there is something wrong with that picture, especially since it is still pretty sketchy how much value for the dollar medstudents get for all that money spent(especially during certain years of school). I am not a math guru, but it looks like if this trend continues, physicians are going to land in the negative(not like it is not happening right now). Or is it the case that medschools don't know what is happening in the real world?

 

[cfdavid]

In the last 10 years, physician income has declined by ~7%, but the average indebtedness of graduating medstudents has risen by ~28%. I don't know about you guys, but I think there is something wrong with that picture, especially since it is still pretty sketchy how much value for the dollar medstudents get for all that money spent(especially during certain years of school). I am not a math guru, but it looks like if this trend continues, physicians are going to land in the negative(not like it is not happening right now). Or is it the case that medschools don't know what is happening in the real world?

Absofrigginlutely. I'm curious as to what will happen to tuition/funding of medical schools if things go social in healthcare. Also, what about debt relief for those that already finished and then find themselves practicing in a single payer system in which salaries of physicians will most likely be considerably less?

Also, what's up with this 6.8% interest on federal student loans? That's sick!

 

[Law2Doc]

In the last 10 years, physician income has declined by ~7%, but the average indebtedness of graduating medstudents has risen by ~28%. I don't know about you guys, but I think there is something wrong with that picture, especially since it is still pretty sketchy how much value for the dollar medstudents get for all that money spent(especially during certain years of school). I am not a math guru, but it looks like if this trend continues, physicians are going to land in the negative(not like it is not happening right now). Or is it the case that medschools don't know what is happening in the real world?

Med schools gotta eat too. Just because doctors are making less doesn't mean med schools, lenders, etc have to bear the pain. Their mission is to accept qualified applicants and train them. So long as they have a backlog of thousands of qualified people willing to pay the tuition they have no good reason to lower it. That not everyone is going to be able to pay down their loans quickly is those individuals' problems.

This kind of crunch was seen years ago in law schools, where some of the more idealistic "save the world" positions in law only paid a fraction of tuition. The low end legal aid, ACLU, Sierra club type positions paid 20-30k, which is not enough to service a high educational loan. Private tuition reimbursement grants today help some people take this route but by and large a lot of people have to find jobs that pay their bills. End conclusion -- not the school's problem. Higher education is a capitalist endeavor (an investment in human capital) not a socialized one.

 

[LifetimeDoc]

End conclusion -- not the school's problem. Higher education is a capitalist endeavor (an investment in human capital) not a socialized one.

Well, state-run medical schools have a social-contract to provide medical training for it's own residents (who supposedly will stay within the same state), so their tuitions are generally lower for in-state residents for that very reason.

 

[Law2Doc]

Well, state-run medical schools have a social-contract to provide medical training for it's own residents (who supposedly will stay within the same state), so their tuitions are generally lower for in-state residents for that very reason.

Even those in-state tuitions are going up, not down. But yes, there are still "deals" to be had with state schools.

 

[sirus_virus]

Med schools gotta eat too. Just because doctors are making less doesn't mean med schools, lenders, etc have to bear the pain. Their mission is to accept qualified applicants and train them. So long as they have a backlog of thousands of qualified people willing to pay the tuition they have no good reason to lower it. That not everyone is going to be able to pay down their loans quickly is those individuals' problems.

This kind of crunch was seen years ago in law schools, where some of the more idealistic "save the world" positions in law only paid a fraction of tuition. The low end legal aid, ACLU, Sierra club type positions paid 20-30k, which is not enough to service a high educational loan. Private tuition reimbursement grants today help some people take this route but by and large a lot of people have to find jobs that pay their bills. End conclusion -- not the school's problem. Higher education is a capitalist endeavor (an investment in human capital) not a socialized one.

I guess it's a dog eat dog world. Although the process is somehow supposed to create altruistic doctors.

 

[Twitch]

... practicing in a single payer system in which salaries of physicians will most likely be considerably less?...

I realize many have these thoughts but I'm just curious as to why? In essence we've lived in a single payor system for years. As long as medicare/medicaid has existed, they have been the basis for rates for private insurance companies as well. Sure there are a few cash only and such but by far we've lived in a single payor system for a long time. Most just won't admit it.

Not suprisingly that the head of medicaid/medicare is considered the most powerful/influential person in healthcare.

 

[MSKalltheway]

In the last 10 years, physician income has declined by ~7%, but the average indebtedness of graduating medstudents has risen by ~28%. I don't know about you guys, but I think there is something wrong with that picture, especially since it is still pretty sketchy how much value for the dollar medstudents get for all that money spent(especially during certain years of school). I am not a math guru, but it looks like if this trend continues, physicians are going to land in the negative(not like it is not happening right now). Or is it the case that medschools don't know what is happening in the real world?

This is an unfortunate situation, but the thing is, lowering tuition wouldnt solve the problem of declining physician reimbursement rates. Actually, medical schools make very little, if any money on tuition. Most of a schools revenue comes from things like research and other factors. At my school, apparently a tiny fraction (maybe 4%?) of revenue comes from tuition costs. The real problem is the state of both health care and education in the country. Once states and the government do a better job funding education, decrease interest rates and we get healthcare cleaned up, tuition may become more tolerable and salaries will get better. But as life always shows us, prices dont get cheaper and salaries dont go up, now do they?

Medicine will continue to become less profitable, but a good check will always result. What will be more important for aspiring med students to understand (even when they come out the gates from high school into college) is that making smart financial decisions regarding education will continue to become more important, and that the Ivy League degree may not always be the best choice, as nice as it is.

 

[SanDiegoSOD]

Medical education is extremely inefficient, and prices could be lowered (or at least maintained) by increased collaboration among schools to reduce redundancies. Basic science education is the same across the nation, and even at the Island schools; why not take advantage of the shared educational goals and work together to save money? I see no real obstacles to having, say, all of the UC's standardize curriculum so that only one set of core notes and power points are being created for basic science classes instead of each campus producing their own. To avoid outcry from Academics, many of whom despise anything standardized, let individual professors that are teaching the classes tweak the materials to highlight things to their preference. Thousands of man hours from highly educated PhDs and MDs could then be diverted back to research, teaching, and clinical duties instead of time wasted on "curriculum development" and powerpoint creation. Savings could be passed on back to staff and faculty and through lowered tuition.
I think that budget shortfalls and rising tuitions have become enough of a problem that schools need to get creative about increasing efficiency and eliminating the constant recreation of the wheel.

 

[Tiger26]

I guess it's a dog eat dog world. Although the process is somehow supposed to create altruistic doctors.

great point! Like how we're not supposed to care about the money while our schools are fleecing us out of every penny we have.

 

[sirus_virus]

This is an unfortunate situation, but the thing is, lowering tuition wouldnt solve the problem of declining physician reimbursement rates. Actually, medical schools make very little, if any money on tuition. Most of a schools revenue comes from things like research and other factors. At my school, apparently a tiny fraction (maybe 4%?) of revenue comes from tuition costs. The real problem is the state of both health care and education in the country. Once states and the government do a better job funding education, decrease interest rates and we get healthcare cleaned up, tuition may become more tolerable and salaries will get better. But as life always shows us, prices dont get cheaper and salaries dont go up, now do they?

Medicine will continue to become less profitable, but a good check will always result. What will be more important for aspiring med students to understand (even when they come out the gates from high school into college) is that making smart financial decisions regarding education will continue to become more important, and that the Ivy League degree may not always be the best choice, as nice as it is.

There is probably a medstudent right now who is a perfect fit for pediatrics, but wouldn't do it because of the huge debt they are carrying(unless they do some type of loan forgiveness program in exchange for practicing in Rectumsville Wyoming). Now this guy/girl has to go after some higher paying specialty for the same reason. Is it my understanding that this meager 4% that medschools are getting from tuition is enough justification for causing the kind of specialty shortage/mismatches that medschool debt has created.

 

[SomeDoc]

Med schools gotta eat too. Just because doctors are making less doesn't mean med schools, lenders, etc have to bear the pain. Their mission is to accept qualified applicants and train them. So long as they have a backlog of thousands of qualified people willing to pay the tuition they have no good reason to lower it. That not everyone is going to be able to pay down their loans quickly is those individuals' problems.
End conclusion -- not the school's problem. Higher education is a capitalist endeavor (an investment in human capital) not a socialized one.

They have no good reason to lower it, but what's the reason for increasing it at the rates we've seen in the past 10 years? I mean, come on. They don't have to lower them, but at the very least, they could try to keep it reasonably stable and adjust it for inflation and other reasonable costs associated with tuition increases. If schools were to document publicly where tuition increases go, it would be nice to see where all that extra green is going.

Who knows, maybe increasing numbers of would be excellent prospective medical students may altogether start choosing to not pursue medicine because of such huge financial commitments. Anyone looking for a decent living can do just as well financially in the long run in a different field, without all the financial hassle.

 

[Law2Doc]

Basic science education is the same across the nation,

It is and it isn't. They all cover the same material. But some have half day lectures some have full. Some use PBL some don't. Some work more clinical stuff into the early years. Some are systems based. The quality of the professors varies. etc etc. So there is no single unified curriculum. And every school thinks it does it the best way and markets their product.

It is probably also an antitrust violation for all schools to combine resources in the way you have described to charge a common amount.

 

[cfdavid]

Med schools gotta eat too. Just because doctors are making less doesn't mean med schools, lenders, etc have to bear the pain. Their mission is to accept qualified applicants and train them. So long as they have a backlog of thousands of qualified people willing to pay the tuition they have no good reason to lower it. That not everyone is going to be able to pay down their loans quickly is those individuals' problems.

This kind of crunch was seen years ago in law schools, where some of the more idealistic "save the world" positions in law only paid a fraction of tuition. The low end legal aid, ACLU, Sierra club type positions paid 20-30k, which is not enough to service a high educational loan. Private tuition reimbursement grants today help some people take this route but by and large a lot of people have to find jobs that pay their bills. End conclusion -- not the school's problem. Higher education is a capitalist endeavor (an investment in human capital) not a socialized one.

No doubt about it. And that's exactly why I think administrators are going to overshoot on the physician supply issue.

 

[Law2Doc]

They have no good reason to lower it, but what's the reason for increasing it at the rates we've seen in the past 10 years? I mean, come on. They don't have to lower them, but at the very least, they could try to keep it reasonably stable and adjust it for inflation and other reasonable costs associated with tuition increases.

Why should they keep it stable? It's not a charity, it's a business (at the least the private schools are). They charge what the market will bear. And currently, with literally half of all applicants (many of them qualified) not getting in each year, it is a seller's market. If you don't like the prices, you go to a state school or choose some other profession. This is the buy in to get in. If it's not a good deal then don't buy in. Totally your choice - nobody is forcing you.

 

[Dr2Bee]

its just economics....

For med schools to reduce their tuition is just wishful thinking. Its not going to happen...the only thing they have tried to do is slow its rise. I can see the negative effects of higher tuition indebtness.... it is forcing many students to go into higher paying specialties and creating healthcare disparities.

A possible solution would be better repayment incentives for students wishing to go into primary care....better than what is available now. I think eventually the shortage of docs in primary care will lead to better offers and repayment incentives for students wishing to pursue primary care in the future.

 

[sirus_virus]

Why should they keep it stable? It's not a charity, it's a business (at the least the private schools are). They charge what the market will bear. And currently, with literally half of all applicants (many of them qualified) not getting in each year, it is a seller's market. If you don't like the prices, you go to a state school or choose some other profession. This is the buy in to get in. If it's not a good deal they don't buy in.

It is easier for you to figure this logic out than say.. a naive 20 year old premed, who thinks this is the way things work, and that the practice of medicine will garauntee them enough money to offset the debt. While most are capable of passing the MCAT, I am not sure they are necessarily the best at figuring out what a good "buy in" is. When a crackhead needs crack, they typically don't look for the best deal, they just look for crack; and medschool is a premed's crack.

 

[SanDiegoSOD]

It is and it isn't. They all cover the same material. But some have half day lectures some have full. Some use PBL some don't. Some work more clinical stuff into the early years. Some are systems based. The quality of the professors varies. etc etc. So there is no single unified curriculum. And every school thinks it does it the best way and markets their product.

You're right, and that's exactly the point. Does every school really need to have a trailblazing, unique curriculum? Of course there are differences of opinion as to what is most effective in preparing students to practice medicine, but I believe that those schools that agree on key points could join forces to develop a shared curriculum that lowers the necessary inputs that each school must provide on a constant basis. It goes beyond shared written materials; it could include online lectures that several schools share, intensive "doctoring" type classes occurring at the same location, etc.
I understand that this isn't going to happen, and your point on school marketing is well taken. I'm just pointing out waste within the system and how schools could reduce such waste.

 

[trichomoniasis]

It is easier for you to figure this logic out than say.. a naive 20 year old premed, who thinks this is the way things work, and that the practice of medicine will garauntee them enough money to offset the debt. While most are capable of passing the MCAT, I am not sure they are necessarily the best at figuring out what a good "buy in" is. When a crackhead needs crack, they typically don't look for the best deal, they just look for crack; and medschool is a premed's crack.

then for the love of god why do you feel it necessary to start what is essentially the same thread at least once every week?

 

[Xerxes1729]

Why should they keep it stable? It's not a charity, it's a business (at the least the private schools are). They charge what the market will bear. And currently, with literally half of all applicants (many of them qualified) not getting in each year, it is a seller's market. If you don't like the prices, you go to a state school or choose some other profession. This is the buy in to get in. If it's not a good deal then don't buy in. Totally your choice - nobody is forcing you.

Private schools are not businesses. They're non-profit organizations.

 

[trichomoniasis]

Private schools are not businesses. They're non-profit organizations.

just because they're not profitable doesn't make them not-for-profit 😀

 

[Law2Doc]

Private schools are not businesses. They're non-profit organizations.

Says who? They generally get some governmental money, grants etc and take advantage of tax exemptions as educational institutions, but are not typically "non-profits".

 

[MSKalltheway]

Private schools are not businesses. They're non-profit organizations.

It may seem so at first glance because of what we all think educational institutions are supposed to be. But you have to remember what these institutions are affiliated with are what makes the money. For instance, almost every big name school has either collegiate athletics or a massive alumni endowment to work from. Every medical is affiliated with one, or many hospitals. Hospitals prove to us time and time again that they are definitely for profit 🙄 Unfortunately even in education, people are looking to profit from it.

 

[cfdavid]

Private schools are not businesses. They're non-profit organizations.

Are you sure about that?? And if so, these types of institutions usually attempt to maximize revenue regardless. Perhaps not "profits", but revenues. It's just too tempting to administrators to want to increase the size of their bureaucracy, even if profits aren't taken.

 

[cfdavid]

I realize many have these thoughts but I'm just curious as to why? In essence we've lived in a single payor system for years. As long as medicare/medicaid has existed, they have been the basis for rates for private insurance companies as well. Sure there are a few cash only and such but by far we've lived in a single payor system for a long time. Most just won't admit it.

Not suprisingly that the head of medicaid/medicare is considered the most powerful/influential person in healthcare.

Most consumers of healthcare in the U.S. are not on Medicare or Medicaid. Thus, most private insurance companies pay more (this depends on the company and premiums ofcourse) than Medicare.

Most of the proposed single payer systems I've read about advocate paying doctors a salary. There would no longer be private groups that competed for business, and thus less incentive to hire the best and brightest. Also, given the "equity" in salaries across the country (after all it's a single payer now), doctors would all earn the same, depending on a predetermined salary decided upon by bureaucrats (some/many of whom could be physicians).

At least the above is what I've recently read in a book called "Second Opinion", by a Harvard-SOM faculty member. I supose it wouldn't need to be that way though.

 

[MSKalltheway]

There is probably a medstudent right now who is a perfect fit for pediatrics, but wouldn't do it because of the huge debt they are carrying(unless they do some type of loan forgiveness program in exchange for practicing in Rectumsville Wyoming). Now this guy/girl has to go after some higher paying specialty for the same reason. Is it my understanding that this meager 4% that medschools are getting from tuition is enough justification for causing the kind of specialty shortage/mismatches that medschool debt has created.

The thing is, even if you leave med school with something like $200,000 in debt as an aspiring pediatrician, if you live smart and dont run for the big benz right away, its more manageable than you think, your big house is on hold for a bit longer. Its not like docs in peds are making $40K a year once they are attendings, more like $140K. The point I'm making is that you cant really blame the debt on professional schools. To be completely honest, I'm not really mad about paying as much as I do for medical school...it is professional school after all. You run into a bit more trouble if you have college loans to pay off also...which compared to medical school, I couldnt justify paying the same sticker price for an undergrad degree after going through it. Law2Doc hit it on the head, if you're so mad about it, go to your state school, get a scholarship, or dont go. I've seen kids come out of college, be $160K in debt, then become teachers. Now THAT is financial stress.

 

[deleted128562]

I have NO problem at all with medical schools charging as much money as they can and making as much money off of me as they can, so long as they shut the hell up about how as a doctor I should be 100% altruistic and unmotivated by financial compensation, etc. The hypocrisy is what sickens me.

I've seen kids come out of college, be $160K in debt, then become teachers. Now THAT is financial stress.

Good gravy, let's hope they aren't teaching math or economics or anything else numbers based. How the hell do you rack up $160K in debt becoming a teacher? That's 40K a year for 4 years which is like big time Harvard level debt without even considering money from grants, scholarships, working, etc.

 

[MSKalltheway]

Good gravy, let's hope they aren't teaching math or economics or anything else numbers based. How the hell do you rack up $160K in debt becoming a teacher? That's 40K a year for 4 years which is like big time Harvard level debt without even considering money from grants, scholarships, working, etc.

Lol, it doesn't even take a Harvard my friend...that's whats sad about the whole thing. Your run of the mill liberal arts college or other large private university has that kind of sticker price. There are tons of schools not even in the top tier that ask for this...

 

[deleted128562]

Lol, it doesn't even take a Harvard my friend...that's whats sad about the whole thing. Your run of the mill liberal arts college or other large private university has that kind of sticker price. There are tons of schools not even in the top tier that ask for this...

Yeah, that is pretty sad. Wow. Well, good on them for becoming teachers even with that sort of debt. They are braver and more altruistic than I.

 

[megadon]

Medical education is extremely inefficient, and prices could be lowered (or at least maintained) by increased collaboration among schools to reduce redundancies. Basic science education is the same across the nation, and even at the Island schools; why not take advantage of the shared educational goals and work together to save money? I see no real obstacles to having, say, all of the UC's standardize curriculum so that only one set of core notes and power points are being created for basic science classes instead of each campus producing their own. To avoid outcry from Academics, many of whom despise anything standardized, let individual professors that are teaching the classes tweak the materials to highlight things to their preference. Thousands of man hours from highly educated PhDs and MDs could then be diverted back to research, teaching, and clinical duties instead of time wasted on "curriculum development" and powerpoint creation. Savings could be passed on back to staff and faculty and through lowered tuition.
I think that budget shortfalls and rising tuitions have become enough of a problem that schools need to get creative about increasing efficiency and eliminating the constant recreation of the wheel.

Sounds like a good idea. Good luck trying to tell Harvard or Princeton that they should chuck their esteemed teaching methods for a one box fits all system. Ego kills this idea from the getgo. It is a good idea though. The other drawback is at least most of the profs at my school hate teaching to the Step 1. Just like teachers hate teaching for the No Child Left Behind standardized tests. It doesn't bother me, I'm the one that has to take the test, but they get really spun up about it.

 

[deleted29780]

i am glad i am being trained in a less money oriented system. i am on a government scholarship. my only obligation is my conscience, give back to the ghanaian tax payer - which i will.
i dont know what all that tuition fee includes. you guys are paying just too much, and you don't really get a good hands on experience either. Some of your schools use dummies, simulations and stuff like that. i am trained in a system where the student is fully exposed to clinical practice. i sometimes feel so disappointed in not only myself, but my colleagues in UGMS, cos we have more than enough patients as learning aids yet still we do not avail ourselves of this opportunity.
You can school in UGMS, pay 8000 dollars an academic year. i pay zero dollars an academic year.

 

[Law2Doc]

Some of your schools use dummies, simulations and stuff like that.

Most US schools that use these see them as a positive not a negative -- you can simulate whatever condition you need and not have to wait for a patient with that particular ailment to check into the hospital to teach from. Also probably better for the patients in the US to have less hands on things done to them before students even get to third year. Folks here learn physical exam/diagnosis stuff before that but not much else hands on. I actually don't think it's the quality of the US med schools or the usefulness of the teaching tools/methodologies that is being attacked in this thread, just that the loans take a long time to pay back on the current salaries. I suspect most people on here feel that the education they are getting is top notch, just pricey.

 

[menaniac]

Sounds like a good idea. Good luck trying to tell Harvard or Princeton that they should chuck their esteemed teaching methods for a one box fits all system. Ego kills this idea from the getgo. It is a good idea though. The other drawback is at least most of the profs at my school hate teaching to the Step 1. Just like teachers hate teaching for the No Child Left Behind standardized tests. It doesn't bother me, I'm the one that has to take the test, but they get really spun up about it.

Not to be picky, but Princeton doesn't have a medical school. Its the only Ivy without any kind of professional school, in fact (Medical, Law or Business). I do agree with the sentiment, though. When it comes to their special curricula, most schools think they *are* the best, and no one should say any different, whether they're Harvard or not. Good luck getting them to cooperate with the competition!

 

[megadon]

Not to be picky, but Princeton doesn't have a medical school. Its the only Ivy without any kind of professional school, in fact (Medical, Law or Business). I do agree with the sentiment, though. When it comes to their special curricula, most schools think they *are* the best, and no one should say any different, whether they're Harvard or not. Good luck getting them to cooperate with the competition!

Did not know that! Thanks. I always wondered why I liked Princeton better than Harvard. (really it's cause when I rowed crew, the guys from Princeton were nice, even though they beat the snot out of us, vs Columbia and Harvard, they were pricks).

 

[deleted29780]

I suspect most people on here feel that the education they are getting is top notch, just pricey.

I thought so too. If it is top notch then its obviously clear that nothing good comes cheap. No matter how bad a doctor's salary is, he will definitely be better of than most people in the society. I think you are all complaining because it puts a strain on your finances especially in the first few years of your practice. It would be wrong for you to suggest that the med schools adjust their current tuitions to match the salaries of doctors. As you said, your education is top notch. If you want high standards, you have to foot the bill.
This thread should not be aimed at the medical schools, it should be aimed at the policy makers in the health sector - an improvement in doctors salaries. Because this is a high risk occpation. Possible infections - HIV, Hep B. A chance of getting sued. The extra long hours of work. The intensive academic schedule a budding doctor goes through. So i suggest you fight for the 7 percent drop in salaries if not more... leave the medical schools alone, they are not a charitable organization. i rest my submission.

 

[SomeDoc]

Honestly, I'm not sure if "education quality" warrants higher tuition. Having gone to a "top 20" undergraduate institution, I feel it was mostly a ripoff (at least for those who had to pay tuition), as I was basically teaching all the coursework to myself from the same pre-med books as anyone else who went to a state school, and was being taught by professors who were unhappy to teach introductory basic science coursework to undergrads, and would rather be in their labs doing their research.

 

[notdeadyet]

They have no good reason to lower it, but what's the reason for increasing it at the rates we've seen in the past 10 years? I mean, come on. They don't have to lower them, but at the very least, they could try to keep it reasonably stable and adjust it for inflation and other reasonable costs associated with tuition increases.

I don't think we've been seeing a huge increase in medical school tuition; I think we're seeing a huge increase in college tuition in general.

I don't think medical school tuition has been skyrocketing at a rate that is that much higher than what undergrad tuition has been going up at.

 

[notdeadyet]

The thing is, even if you leave med school with something like $200,000 in debt as an aspiring pediatrician, if you live smart and dont run for the big benz right away, its more manageable than you think, your big house is on hold for a bit longer. Its not like docs in peds are making $40K a year once they are attendings, more like $140K.

Those who cry the loudest about what a bad gig doctor's get seem to actually look at the numbers the least. Even with declining salaries, education costs for a physician are still one of the safest investments in town.

Folks shudder at the thought of taking on $200K to become a pediatrician at $140K/year, even though it's a better ROI than the $100K they took to get a BA for a $40K/year job. No one looks at undergrad costs as a bad investment. And the average med school graduate is going to make more than $140K and is going to take on loans of less than $200K, so it's an even sweeter deal.

That said, I'm looking at primary care and taking on about $240K. Do I feel like I'm winning the lottery here? No. Am I sweating my ability to lead a comfortable life? No.

 

[Law2Doc]

That said, I'm looking at primary care and taking on about $240K. Do I feel like I'm winning the lottery here? No. Am I sweating my ability to lead a comfortable life? No.

I think people are looking at an older generation of richer doctors and realizing that with the numbers today they probably won't ever get there. They will be comfortable, but not rich (by comparison). So it's a matter of people having to borrow more to earn less. Still will be a nice lifestyle, but "this isn't your father's oldsmobile".🙂 And that makes some people feel gypped.

 

[notdeadyet]

I think people are looking at an older generation of richer doctors and realizing that with the numbers today they probably won't ever get there.

So maybe premeds now are coming to the same realizations that prelaws came to in the mid-80's? That admission to professional school is not the ticket on the gravy train that it may have been decades ago?

They will be comfortable, but not rich (by comparison). So it's a matter of people having to borrow more to earn less. Still will be a nice lifestyle, but "this isn't your father's oldsmobile".🙂

That's the truth. But nothing is, though. In tech, I've had to re-educate fresh grads that the money is not what it was 10 years ago either.

 

[CenteredDoc]

This is an unfortunate situation, but the thing is, lowering tuition wouldnt solve the problem of declining physician reimbursement rates.

No it won't. But at least we'll be in smaller debt after we graduate.

 

[CenteredDoc]

Those who cry the loudest about what a bad gig doctor's get seem to actually look at the numbers the least. Even with declining salaries, education costs for a physician are still one of the safest investments in town.

Safest investment when you just consider the money that's going in? Maybe true.
Safest investment when you add in the time spent getting into med school, med school itself, then finally residency? I doubt it.

 

[soonereng]

Safest investment when you just consider the money that's going in? Maybe true.
Safest investment when you add in the time spent getting into med school, med school itself, then finally residency? I doubt it.

True, true. One does have to take in to account the time value of money. I have worked for 6+ years as an engineer. When I was interviewing one interviewer asked: "Do you realize it will cost you about 1/2 million to go to med school?" I said, yeah. That will be my actual lost money compared to working as an engineer for those 7 years. Add two more years for a surgical residency or a fellowship and including the money that I would have made in my retirement fund and the number goes way higher.

I sat down and ran the numbers, and for me pursuing medicine will probably be at best a break even proposition in the end monetarily. So it's a good thing that money is not my sole motivation for entering this field, but I think that we all know that.

And yes, I think the medical education system (really all post-secondary education) is too expensive in relation to the service provided, but they have a monopoly so what are we going to do?

 

[Law2Doc]

And yes, I think the medical education system (really all post-secondary education) is too expensive in relation to the service provided, but they have a monopoly so what are we going to do?

They only have a monopoly if you consider their product the only one that suits your needs. They certainly don't have a monopoly on careers, professions, health jobs. So it depends on how you define things.

 

[LifetimeDoc]

mmm, I think the private school tuitions are pretty high, but I feel like I'm getting a good deal from my local school with a $19400/tuition. Maybe I'll change my tune depending on the quality of the education, but I hear it's pretty good. We can't work because there is way too much information to absorb in the time that we have, and scholarships aren't as plentiful as in undergrad. I don't know what all the fuss is about as it's a ~$85k investment in school for a job that secure and pays over $100k/year when you are done. The living expenses are the same pretty much whatever career you are studying. So if you include that in the calculation it's a $175k investment. It's early, and I'm rambling.

 

[DickyV]

mmm, I think the private school tuitions are pretty high, but I feel like I'm getting a good deal from my local school with a $9700/year tuition.

Wow! I went to a pretty expensive undergrad where housing was that much per year.

Between undergrad, my masters program and being an out-of-stater in med school, I'm looking at 300K+. 😱

 

[soonereng]

They only have a monopoly if you consider their product the only one that suits your needs. They certainly don't have a monopoly on careers, professions, health jobs. So it depends on how you define things.

Let me clarify: educational institutions have a monopoly on accreditation. One could self-study all the material tested on the MCAT get a 36 on it and wouldn't be admitted to medical school because they didn't have the "required coursework."

Same thing with Step 1, but you can't even take it if you aren't at an accredited institution. This probably couldn't be extended to Step 2 though.

If one is a self-learner like me, you definitely don't get what you pay for.

 

[soonereng]

mmm, I think the private school tuitions are pretty high, but I feel like I'm getting a good deal from my local school with a $9700/year tuition. Maybe I'll change my tune depending on the quality of the education, but I hear it's pretty good. We can't work because there is way too much information to absorb in the time that we have, and scholarships aren't as plentiful as in undergrad. I don't know what all the fuss is about as it's a ~$50k investment in school for a job that secure and pays over $100k when you are done. The living expenses are the same pretty much whatever career you are studying. So if you include that in the calculation it's a $170k investment. It's early, and I'm rambling.

You have pretty cheap tution. That $9700 doesn't cover one semester at my school. But you also have to take into account the lost opportunity cost. It's not just what school is costing you, but that plus what you could have made using the current training and skills you already have. Now if one has an unmarketable degree then this might be an accurate assessment.

 

[LifetimeDoc]

You have pretty cheap tution. That $9700 doesn't cover one semester at my school. But you also have to take into account the lost opportunity cost. It's not just what school is costing you, but that plus what you could have made using the current training and skills you already have. Now if one has an unmarketable degree then this might be an accurate assessment.

Whoops...didn't get enough caffeine this morning. I should have said $9700/semester. So that's $19400/year, or $77600/4 years. 😳 Still $175k for all four years in loans, using the school's budget. Still cheap I guess, I know a lot of people pay more.

 

[peace zealot]

i am glad i am being trained in a less money oriented system. i am on a government scholarship. my only obligation is my conscience, give back to the ghanaian tax payer - which i will.
i dont know what all that tuition fee includes. you guys are paying just too much, and you don't really get a good hands on experience either. Some of your schools use dummies, simulations and stuff like that. i am trained in a system where the student is fully exposed to clinical practice. i sometimes feel so disappointed in not only myself, but my colleagues in UGMS, cos we have more than enough patients as learning aids yet still we do not avail ourselves of this opportunity.
You can school in UGMS, pay 8000 dollars an academic year. i pay zero dollars an academic year.

well in pakistan the fees are so low they make 200dollars an year for 5 years and even if you study for self finance basis it is4000 dollars...i think my country provides quite a cheap medical education with abundance of patients in clinical years and cadavers in first 2 years.the only problem which is a major one is teaching faculty.many of them are just good got educated abroad most of them at uk and also usa...we have never to think about loans its out of question.government and other organizations do help to those who cant pay even 200 dollars.the fact is all schools are government non is private.
its a trend people doing house job in surgery do independent appendisectomies after just 3 months and assist since 1st day.the patient load is too much nand they are so poor that it is necessary in our part of world.