Was this article written by
@stoichiometrist 😉.
The points made in this article are good. Paying your debts off early is always sound advice (unless you're going to a school like USC and plan to be a type b pharmD) The numbers presented are... questionable.
lol the blog does seem to scream that it's someone from SDN lol.
the numbers aren't really questionable. the reason is because time is on the tech's side. literally a 10 year headstart in saving and compounding. see this...
http://www.bestmedicaldegrees.com/salary-of-doctors/
it's a common topic and one students really need to think about, that it's not all how it seems. it's a main reason why we discourage students from taking huge loans for a salary that will likely not be high enough.not just pharmacy but pharmacy has a lot of other problems happening now and will worsen in the future besides the cost-benefit.
however the beef i have with the post is that it's assuming 6% savings for both. but let's assume similar cost of living for both the tech and the pharmacist. the pharmacist technically can then save a larger percent of their income or have more $$ on hand for kids. Maybe a pharmacist can save 10 even 20% if they live with parents or have same lifestyle as a tech. If both the tech and pharmacist spend same amount per year, then pharmacist can beat tech. If they each invest 6% and spend the rest, tech wins that makes perfect sense.
in reality well no one knows. everyone's different. but i'd estimate that most of you guys want to be pharmacists so you can make that money and spend that money and not be financially savvy enough to save and invest. a lot of MD's have no self control on spending or budgeting, i'll assume and know of many pharmacists who are the same. you don't want to be a pharmacist to live the same lifestyle as a tech and have 20K for spending. no most i daresay want nice house, nice cars, 2-3 kids, lotta vacations, whole foods, etc etc. in the end that'll set you back. not to say that the tech won't spend either, the tech probably isn't saving 6% because they're not as educated, more impulsive didn't go to college, no fiscal or little discipline at all, etc.
it's not just how much you make but how much you spend. you make $200K and spend $200K and you will be poorer than someone making $20K and spending $10K. of course you can change habits and easily save a lot if you make more but time isn't on your side. if you look past year 30 you can kind of see that the pharmacist will start to match and catch up to the tech, of course you will probably be laid off by 50 anyway but for prepharmacy sake let's be mindlessly optimistic anyway!
in the long run i think the pharmacist should be even or a little more than the tech assuming very similar lifestyles and actual average pharmacy tuition. the writer used U Wash, most prepharmers in SDN go to schools 2-4X as much so it's actually worse.
I would like to add though, that it's far easier to get a job as a computer programmer than as a pharmacist due to growth in the field. You also get better benefits, stock options, amenities, etc. and do not have to deal with yelling patients in retail where 70% of the pharmacist jobs are.
