How to make a million dollars a year as a Doctor...

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
A few days ago ABCnews or NBC reported that he spent a total of $800 on two haircuts. What the??? :eek:!

I hope that was the dopest southside fade ever....haha. I think they were doing it to donate money or something like that.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Our behavior prof advised us all to become plumbers, since he paid $90 cash for about 20 minutes of work. Couple of quick calculations, and that comes out to $680K a year (if you work 8 hrs/day, 300days a year).
 
No, that's not the expectation of most in the industry. Medical salaries as a whole are declining, and those that are doing best are currently only staying stagnant. It's predicted to get worse, not better, as insurance companies increase their stranglehold. Physicians are facing decreasing reimbursements, increasing insurance costs, and are bearing more than their fair share of the blame for rising healthcare costs. Expect compensation to continue its slow decline over the short term.

i disagree.
phase 1) baby boomers grow old and sick
phase 2)...............
phase 3) profit.
gnome-chart.jpg
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Does making healthcare across the US a standard provided by the US Government great for the country and not so great for future physicians?

Not quite. Socialized health care results in lower reimbursement rates and hence decreased earnings for the docs. If the tuition is where it is now, doctors will have tough times paying off their debts once they graduate. This will discourage a lot of competent individuals from going into medicine which will result in less competition for the application process. The schools have to have somebody to fill their rosters and so anybody with a 2.0gpa can be a doctor. Imagine what effect that would have on the quality of health care and the whole country. Just look at Canada for example.
 
i still question all this talk about doctors and not making enough money. doctors still have the highest salary in the nation according to salary.com/usnews:

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/best_careers_2007/careertable.htm


making a million dollars is another ballgame but having a decent living is certainly attainable. perhaps is my naivety but i expect to make a good amount of money. all this talk of not making enough and decreasing compensation seems silly to me as according to the averages, doctors make the most still.

It goes to what others have said in the "Investment Banking vs. Doctor" type threads.

Doctors all generally make a lot of money. The fields where people pull in million dollar+ salaries tend to have a less average pay with a tremendous upside.

There aren't many doctors who make less than 100k. Even among the doctors who work in well paying practices (surgery specialties, derm, cardiology) you see around 350-500K. Of course there are the exceptional outliers, doctors who invent medical therapies, or who run businesses who push the average weay up.

If you look at "finance" as a general category, the average makes a LOT less than 100k. There are a few who make into the hundreds of thousands of dollar range a year, then there are the select few CEOS and such who make multi millions a year.

The thing is, even though they do occur, there really aren't that many businessman who make that kind of money, and they tend to occur in big cities. Almost every community in America has at least one doctor, and several decent sized towns have hospitals with tons of the doctors.

---

The real secret to making a "ton" of money as a doctor is investment. If you're going into something somewhat competitive and making 200k, you've got a great source of initial capitol there. You can do it in the medical field, if you want.

I know a doctor who's an IM specialty that he loves and still works at just as hard as anyone. But he's pulling down ridiculous bank compared to others in his field. How? 20 years ago he was the third partner in the private practice group he works for. They've grown tremendously and now (although he does have some administrative work related to it) he gets to work in his field and still be super succesful financially.

Or you can just take your money and invest it non medically. I know somebody whos' done that as well. He's invested in real estate, businesses, and stocks. He pulls in more than a million a year but it's all just a game too him. He doesn't spend it like bling. He just likes the act of making money and picking winning investments.
 
Not quite. Socialized health care results in lower reimbursement rates and hence decreased earnings for the docs. If the tuition is where it is now, doctors will have tough times paying off their debts once they graduate. This will discourage a lot of competent individuals from going into medicine which will result in less competition for the application process. The schools have to have somebody to fill their rosters and so anybody with a 2.0gpa can be a doctor. Imagine what effect that would have on the quality of health care and the whole country. Just look at Canada for example.

Um, you are replying to a post made back in March. Please acknowledge when you are bumping up an old stale thread, so others aren't confused. Carry on. :)
 
The radiologists at the hospital in my hometown make 650,000 a year and take 12 wks vacation

that is how to make the cash

invest most of that and after 5 or 6 years your investments and earnings will be earning you the cash medschoolrocks.com
 
Invest wisely. Don't blow your money on frivolous things.

This is is the biggest thing. Its not completely in what you do but in how you invest your money.

No one will be making a million dollars a year the second they step out of residency but those who know how to invest will become wealthier if they don't splurge away the second they start earning.

The other big thing is that those who are the wealthiest are those who either had side business ventures which they invested in or who were the CEO of their own group practice and things of that nature.

The other key thing, then, may be summarized as being innovative in your business dealings without compromising patient care.
 
I completely agree in that if that big money is to be made, then you need to have a business sense outside of medicine to do so. Medicine is a steady income, but you won't be Trump simply by patient care. And I always have to laugh at the "we do four years of med school and 3-8 of residency and go into all this debt and we should be paid tons a year!" as if medicine should be entitled to that kind of pay. Yeah, I cant lie even I want to be comfortable when I'm all done and have a family, but I'm not gonna be mad at the 150K average a GP makes if thats what I do and earn. Be smart and that "measly" check goes a long way. Know what you've signed up for and if you have that much of a problem with it, debate it in Wash DC.
 
The radiologists at the hospital in my hometown make 650,000 a year and take 12 wks vacation

I've always wondered about that...why is it that radiologists make so much money? They have an easier job compared to surgeons and such. Most of their work just deals with x-rays...

Also...if you don't mind me asking, what state do you live in? I know salaries are highly dependent on location.

The person that said plumbers make a lot of money...SO TRUE! My parents own two hotels and we have AC repair people, plumbers, and electricians who come in and charge anywhere from $80-$180 per hour!
 
I've always wondered about that...why is it that radiologists make so much money? They have an easier job compared to surgeons and such. Most of their work just deals with x-rays...

Also...if you don't mind me asking, what state do you live in? I know salaries are highly dependent on location.

The person that said plumbers make a lot of money...SO TRUE! My parents own two hotels and we have AC repair people, plumbers, and electricians who come in and charge anywhere from $80-$180 per hour!
Ummm....Radiologists do alot more than read xrays. Ever heard of CT, MRI, PET, fMRI,CTA, Ultrasound, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, neurointerventional, musculoskeletal etc, CT guided biopsies etc.
A radiologist must train for five years, pass boards in physics,as well as Radiology and be comfortable with interpreting images of multiple modalities from all over the body. While a Pathologist is more of a cytologic/histologic diagnostician, the Radiologist has a valuable role as an anatomic/structural diagnostician.

Currently they do get reimbursed well, but remember that they are responsible for what they see/ don't see on an imaging study, and in the litigious climate in which medicine currently finds itself, they best be very good at what they do to avoid some lawyers wrath. Why do you think so few Radiologist want to read mammo.?
Making $50 for reading a head CT, and making a diagnosis is pittance if you think about all the training that went into being eligible to make that diagnosis ( medical school and residency training both in terms of time and cost ). Doing that 200 times a night for a Nighthawk operation, however = $10,000 generated, with the Radiologist taking home anywhere from $2,000 to $4,000 according to a doc. I know who used to do it.
 
Ummm....Radiologists do alot more than read xrays. Ever heard of CT, MRI, PET, fMRI,CTA, Ultrasound, nuclear medicine, interventional radiology, neurointerventional, musculoskeletal etc, CT guided biopsies etc.

Obviously I've heard of them.

Most of that stuff is technology based whereas other fields such as surgery are labor/technique based. In my opinion, surgeons have a much tougher job than radiologists and should be payed accordingly.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Obviously I've heard of them.

Most of that stuff is technology based whereas other fields such as surgery are labor/technique based. In my opinion, surgeons have a much tougher job than radiologists and should be payed accordingly.

Technology based, yes, but they still have to interpret the images. That is where the skill lies, and that is what they get paid for. I agree that general surgeons should get paid more than they do. But to suggest that Radiologists somehow do not earn their bread is inaccurate. Imaging has become the proxy for the H & P in the U.S. Think of virtually any patient in a hospital, and they will have imaging work done.They are a vital cog in the machine that allows surgeries to proceed. Just because a Rad. is sitting in a dark room looking at images does not mean they are not working hard.Treatment oftentimes is contingent upon their findings/ or lack thereof But, the work is more cerebral in nature, while the general surgeon is a workhorse for churning out procedure after procedure.

Again,I do agree that the Surgeons get the short end of the stick, and should be reimbursed better. You'll be hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees with that,outside of the John Edwards of the world.
 
And I always have to laugh at the "we do four years of med school and 3-8 of residency and go into all this debt and we should be paid tons a year!" as if medicine should be entitled to that kind of pay. Yeah, I cant lie even I want to be comfortable when I'm all done and have a family, but I'm not gonna be mad at the 150K average a GP makes if thats what I do and earn.

While I agree there should not be a sense of entitlement, it is perfectly reasonable to expect a hefty reward at the end of 11 years of training. It's the ol' "you get out what you put in" phenomenon. And while you may very well be perfectly happy making 90K/yr as a physician, there are a great many people who would be upset at that kind of salary after such a heavy time, monetary, and intellectual investment. And who are you/I/anyone else to tell them that they are "wrong?"

If physician salaries continue to dwindle, it should be no surprise that medical school applications also dwindle (as they have vs. applications in the 70's and 80's). Eventually (and probably not anytime soon), those applications will fall to the point where med schools can't fill their seats, and then the madness ensues...

As an aside, while I certainly agree with the idea of "business sense" being necessary, it has nothing to do with the fact that your paycheck as a physician is going down. Business sense allows you to keep what you have and expand on it. But that's tough to do on $80K/yr with an office to run, loans to payback, and malpractice to keep up. There is nothing wrong with expecting a hefty paycheck after such a huge investment. And it's an individual's choice as to whether they take that paycheck and buy mutual funds or a Mercedes.
 
Seriously, everyone is thinking this exact thought if you are in medical school. I don't want to hear those liberal whinings about the poor and all that crap. Everyone is concerned about their future bank account! So, we've worked hard for 4 years of school, and then (for surgery) like 6 to 7 years of residency and we want to make some money. If the system is socialized, the government will be in control of our wages as a whole. We cannot let that happen. What are some ideas to prevent that from happening as well as maximize our bank rolls?

Sell crack!
 
I hope that was the dopest southside fade ever....haha. I think they were doing it to donate money or something like that.

lol... like someone said earlier.... he got robbed.
 
You don't have to make a ton to end up with a lot of cash.

For instance:
30yrs
$4K/mo. (48K/yr)
8.0% (very safe)

$5,961,437.79

Compound this with moderately well placed investments in real estate (your home, a mountain house, a beach house, etc...) and you would be worth well over $10M after 30 years as a primary care physician.

BTW - if you supersize your specialty and make over 200K per year and invest 100K/year @ the same paltry 8.0%the numbers look like this:

$12.4M

Just be smart... although the fact that you are looking to make a lot probably means you won't be very frugal.

While I'm sure the math is correct those numbers are unrealistic. It is very difficult to save 100K a year if you make 200K a year, unless you live in one of the most outlying, rural areas in the US.
 
This is completely off topic, but does anyone know anything about Roth IRA? I heard that it is a good way to invest money, and if you start early, you should have a good amount my retirement. My question is, if I'm not employed (my money is from birthday and graduation gifts), can I use that money towards investing.

I don't want to be a completely broke medical student...but I'm sure that's how it will turn out.
 
While I'm sure the math is correct those numbers are unrealistic. It is very difficult to save 100K a year if you make 200K a year, unless you live in one of the most outlying, rural areas in the US.

Once you've paid off your loans, that's not hard at all.

The median household salary in this country is probably in the 40-50K/annum range. Living on twice that is hardly very difficult.
 
This is completely off topic, but does anyone know anything about Roth IRA? I heard that it is a good way to invest money, and if you start early, you should have a good amount my retirement. My question is, if I'm not employed (my money is from birthday and graduation gifts), can I use that money towards investing.

I don't want to be a completely broke medical student...but I'm sure that's how it will turn out.

A Roth IRA is a great way (and a superior way) to save money as compared to a traditional IRA. The main distinction is deposited money in a Roth IRA has already been taxed, as opposed to a Traditional IRA. Monies in both accounts grow tax free.

For example, say you get a check from a job that is 10K. For a traditional IRA, you can deposit that money directly in that account. That 10K will growth over time, say to 50K. When you withdraw that money you will be taxed at your current income bracket, anywhere from 10% to 36%.

If you want to put that 10K into your Roth IRA, you *first* pay taxes on that 10K. That will reduce it to, say, 7.5K. That 7.5K is then put in a Roth IRA and it grows over time. The 7.5K will end up as 38K, but when you withdraw it you pay no taxes.

When one compares Traditional IRA vs. Roth IRA, the Roth almost always comes out on top.

Note the actual example above may not be completely accurate because there are deposit maximums for each IRA.
 
Once you've paid off your loans, that's not hard at all.

The median household salary in this country is probably in the 40-50K/annum range. Living on twice that is hardly very difficult.

I'm not sure you understand even what a minimal amount of expenses amount to for someone who makes 200K a year. The gov't and state take 40% off the top. One would have to rent in an incredibly cheap apartment, have no car, no girlfriend/boyfriend or spouse, no children, have minimal entertainment expenses, no premiums for insurance of any kind. While this is theoretical possible, it is an extremely unlikely scenario that the 200K after taxes and expenses winds up being 100K. Same thing for 100K to 48K.
 
I'm not sure you understand even what a minimal amount of expenses amount to for someone who makes 200K a year. The gov't and state take 40% off the top. One would have to rent in an incredibly cheap apartment, have no car, no girlfriend/boyfriend or spouse, no children, have minimal entertainment expenses, no premiums for insurance of any kind. While this is theoretical possible, it is an extremely unlikely scenario that the 200K after taxes and expenses winds up being 100K. Same thing for 100K to 48K.

40% ?

Maybe in Cali...
 
A Roth IRA is a great way (and a superior way) to save money as compared to a traditional IRA. The main distinction is deposited money in a Roth IRA has already been taxed, as opposed to a Traditional IRA. Monies in both accounts grow tax free.

For example, say you get a check from a job that is 10K. For a traditional IRA, you can deposit that money directly in that account. That 10K will growth over time, say to 50K. When you withdraw that money you will be taxed at your current income bracket, anywhere from 10% to 36%.

If you want to put that 10K into your Roth IRA, you *first* pay taxes on that 10K. That will reduce it to, say, 7.5K. That 7.5K is then put in a Roth IRA and it grows over time. The 7.5K will end up as 38K, but when you withdraw it you pay no taxes.

When one compares Traditional IRA vs. Roth IRA, the Roth almost always comes out on top.

Note the actual example above may not be completely accurate because there are deposit maximums for each IRA.

Hmmm...I think I might look into this. Do you know if you have to be employed to put money in? If so, what if it is just a summer job?
 
Hmmm...I think I might look into this. Do you know if you have to be employed to put money in? If so, what if it is just a summer job?

No! You don't need to be employed for either the Roth or Traditional IRA. Remember that once you put money in, you cannot withdraw money from it without penalty until you are at least 60 years old.
 
No! You don't need to be employed for either the Roth or Traditional IRA. Remember that once you put money in, you cannot withdraw money from it without penalty until you are at least 60 years old.

There are a few other exceptions, like paying for your kids school, but generally true.

Back to the radiology debate, the current SCHID bill cuts reimbursment to radiologists around 40%. So it may not be the cash cow it used to be if passed (although Bush said he would veto, but may be veto proof). Outside any surgical practice (OB/GYN, surgery), these guys are most open to malpractice for failing to catch something. I have nothing to back that up beyond common sense, but you failed to catch my tumor tops my list. I'm not defending them, I don't want to be a radiologist (how do you hide a dollar from a radiologist, put it on a patient), but they carry a lot of risk.

As far as the orignal post, if you want to make 1 mil, add boutique to your practice. Botox will substantially add to your income. I don't think its covered by medicare (hope not) so isn't subject to capatation. There are FP's out there pulling down 7 figures just by adding it.
 
I'm not sure you understand even what a minimal amount of expenses amount to for someone who makes 200K a year.

While you have a valid point about taxes, a person's/household's expenses don't automatically go up because their income goes up.

If a physician making 200K/year goes into a grocery store at the same time as a secretary making 25K/year, do they get charged different prices for a pound of chicken? I think not.

Ability to save money depends on the sort of lifestyle one chooses. If you eat fillet mignon nightly, drive two Rolls Royces and send all of your kids to boarding school in Switzerland then, yes, it is hard to save anything on a 200K/year salary (whether before or after taxes). Everything you cut back on from there can go straight into whatever sort of investment vehicle you prefer.
 
You will be in the top tax bracket federally, which is approximately 35%. State tax brackets range from approx. 0 - 10% depending on where you live.

I'm not sure you understand taxation fully.

First off, 200K/year is actually in the 33% tax bracket (a significant difference with an income of 200K)

Second, you don't pay that 33% on your entire salary. Generally, taxes are tiered - you pay 10% of the first 7,000 or so, 15% of whatever is in the next bracket, and so on.

Third, your tax rate only applies to taxable income. Even if you just take the standard deduction and have a family of 4 (4 exemptions), that will reduce your taxable income from 200K to 176,500, which will reduce your tax burden by over $7,000. The actual numbers (FY2006) - the family of 4 making $200K/year will pay $38,824 in federal taxes - less than 20% of their gross income.

Fourth, anyone with a good accountant will be able to take even more (legitimate) deductions, adjustments to gross income and credits to reduce their tax liability even further.
 
I'm not sure you understand taxation fully.

First off, 200K/year is actually in the 33% tax bracket (a significant difference with an income of 200K)

Second, you don't pay that 33% on your entire salary. Generally, taxes are tiered - you pay 10% of the first 7,000 or so, 15% of whatever is in the next bracket, and so on.

Third, your tax rate only applies to taxable income. Even if you just take the standard deduction and have a family of 4 (4 exemptions), that will reduce your taxable income from 200K to 176,500, which will reduce your tax burden by over $7,000. The actual numbers (FY2006) - the family of 4 making $200K/year will pay $38,824 in federal taxes - less than 20% of their gross income.

Fourth, anyone with a good accountant will be able to take even more (legitimate) deductions, adjustments to gross income and credits to reduce their tax liability even further.

I do understand taxation fully as I have been paying taxes for the past 7 years. During that time I have been paying all my bills, have a spouse and children, and making a lot of money (not quite 200K but fairly close).

As for your previous post, your first sentence is not generally true. The vast, vast majority of Americans end up spending incrementally more when they make incrementally more. Their spending habits certainly don't go down. And the example you gave about having two Rolls Royces and sending your children to expensive boarding schools is only applicable to the very top < 1% of families who have the resources to do that. They are making much more than 200K a year.
 
As for your previous post, your first sentence is not generally true. The vast, vast majority of Americans end up spending incrementally more when they make incrementally more. Their spending habits certainly don't go down.

And you missed my point completely. I realize that most people who make more money spend more money. However, there is nothing FORCING them to do so.

And the example you gave about having two Rolls Royces and sending your children to expensive boarding schools is only applicable to the very top < 1% of families who have the resources to do that. They are making much more than 200K a year.

Which is why it was an example. :rolleyes:
 
However, there is nothing FORCING them to do so.

I'm not sure all psychologists would agree. People's "needs" tend to be less when they can afford less, but will normalize when that constraint is removed. So someone earning a bit more can still be living fairly modestly, but still have to spend more than they did when they were broke -- their spending habits adjust ever so subtly and it becomes inconceivable to do otherwise. We aren't talking about excesses and luxuries (like Rolls Royces) that you would have to be aware of, but little things that all add up-- your needs will simply change based on your not having to focus as much on the bottom line. Suddenly the day old bread and meatless diets are no longer acceptable. You run the AC or heat at a slightly higher level. Driving to work instead of taking the bus becomes a necessity. You maybe fly to the annual domestic vacation destinations instead of drive. You replace worn out shoes the week they start looking bad, not the month. You get haircuts before you start looking scraggly, not after. Not exactly living the high life but it all adds up. And you likely aren't even aware you are doing it. Speaking from experience, if you earn a certain amount of money one year, and then with a raise you earn significantly more the next year, you will be shocked that what seemed at the time like it was going to be a lot of money really didn't go much further. Happens to pretty much everyone. Your expenses rise to meet what you can afford and it all happens in tiny chunks (not big luxury purchases) so you don't even know it's happening.
 
sometimes I do think doctors should be making less than we do now so we can have less people going into it for money (although the med school loans do suck).
 
I'm not sure all psychologists would agree. People's "needs" tend to be less when they can afford less, but will normalize when that constraint is removed. So someone earning a bit more can still be living fairly modestly, but still have to spend more than they did when they were broke -- their spending habits adjust ever so subtly and it becomes inconceivable to do otherwise. We aren't talking about excesses and luxuries (like Rolls Royces) that you would have to be aware of, but little things that all add up-- your needs will simply change based on your not having to focus as much on the bottom line. Suddenly the day old bread and meatless diets are no longer acceptable. You run the AC or heat at a slightly higher level. Driving to work instead of taking the bus becomes a necessity. You maybe fly to the annual domestic vacation destinations instead of drive. You replace worn out shoes the week they start looking bad, not the month. You get haircuts before you start looking scraggly, not after. Not exactly living the high life but it all adds up. And you likely aren't even aware you are doing it. Speaking from experience, if you earn a certain amount of money one year, and then with a raise you earn significantly more the next year, you will be shocked that what seemed at the time like it was going to be a lot of money really didn't go much further. Happens to pretty much everyone. Your expenses rise to meet what you can afford and it all happens in tiny chunks (not big luxury purchases) so you don't even know it's happening.

Well, what psychologists would think about the context is irrelevant. It's still a choice thats made- perceiving "day old bread...(as being) unacceptable" or "get(ting) haircuts before you start looking scraggly" are perfect examples of spending more than needed in the absence of necessity. The fact that a choice is even feasible in such a context (with the chosen option being the financially worse one) is self-illustrative to the point.
 
Seriously, everyone is thinking this exact thought if you are in medical school. I don't want to hear those liberal whinings about the poor and all that crap. Everyone is concerned about their future bank account! So, we've worked hard for 4 years of school, and then (for surgery) like 6 to 7 years of residency and we want to make some money. If the system is socialized, the government will be in control of our wages as a whole. We cannot let that happen. What are some ideas to prevent that from happening as well as maximize our bank rolls?

Nice try my friend but the government has already begun there takeover of Healthcare..... Have you heard of the new bill just passed in the House. Its called the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act of 2007. Reducing physician reimbursement rates by 10% in 2008 and another 15% in 2009. All kinds of cuts negatively impacting radiology.... http://www.acr.org/HomePageCategories/News/ACRNewsCenter/HousePassesSCHIP.aspx
 
sometimes I do think doctors should be making less than we do now so we can have less people going into it for money (although the med school loans do suck).

Ummm....no.
 
play the stock market or real estate

sell your organs on the black market

pimp yourself out to 10,000 fat chicks for 100 bux apiece. Or pimp yourself out to 100 fat chicks for 10,000 bux a piece.

...

What. Fat chicks need loving too.
 
Someone making 200k per year will pay about 50k in federal income taxes. This can be figured from the IRS website: http://www.irs.gov/formspubs/article/0,,id=150856,00.html

Some tax breaks from kids and some state income tax will approximately keep it about the same so let's just say 50k for argument's sake.

So now we are down to 150k.

The median house price (and most docs will buy over the median, but let's just say they don't) is about 250k and monthly payments including principle, interest and insurance could easily be $2000. 2k x 12 = 24k.

Down to 126k.

A couple of decent cars could easily cost $800 per month for payments and insurance. Food, gas, bills (cell phone, internet, tv, gas, elec, water, sewer, garbage), necessities and other expenses for you, your spouse and a couple kids can easily be $2700 per month. $3500 x 12 = 42k

Down to 84k.

Note that all this would buy only a very average lifestyle.

Experts say you should plan to spend about 10% of your income on unexpected expenses related to accidents, house repairs, medical bills, etc.

Down to 64k.

Average student loan amount is around 120k. Payments after deferring through residency would probably be around $750/mo, although this can vary DRASTICALLY. (My payments will be $650 on 140k, but half of my loans are at <3% interest) Anyways . . . 750 x 12 = 9000

Down to 55k

That's enough to buy a Corvette and a trip to Europe! Retirement is so far off anyways and I am sure I will find money to save later . . .

Investing 55k per year could still get you over 5 million easily in 30 years. Think you want some nicer stuff earlier? Buy a house twice as expensive, a couple more cars and the 15k you have left over per year will only be about 1.5 million after 30 years, but that 500k house you just paid off is probably worth 4 million now. Invest evenly in stocks and real estate. Bonds never hurt either . . . sometimes they break records . . . home run records. All my figures are using 7% rates.

Thanks to the OP, this has been a very fun thread to read and your posts are hilarious!

I would say spine surgeons are the only docs regularly making over $1 mil purely as a doctor.
 
I found median salaries from seven sources and then averaged the values if I had values from at least 3 sources. Here is what I came up with:

Spine Surgery 522,667
Heart Surgery 469,500
Cards-Interventional 427,333
Neurosurgery 424,667
Ortho-Hand 412,000
Ortho-Joint Replace 408,000
Ophtho-Retina 386,667
Vascular Surgery 343,667
Interventional Pain 342,000
Orthopedic Surgery 339,286
Radiation Oncology 337,750
Plastic Surgery 336,833
Pediatric Surgeon 329,000
Radiology 307,143
Urology 305,143
Cardiology 297,857
Gastroenterology 281,429
Anesthesiology 280,714
ENT 279,000
Surgery 272,333
Nuclear Medicine 264,000
Ophthalmology 260,286
OB/Gyn 253,714
Pathology 245,800
Neonatology 241,500
Heme/Onc 241,143
Peds Crit/Pulm 240,333
Peds Cardiology 237,750
Dermatology 232,833
Pulmonology/Crit 225,000
Nephrology 224,333
Emergency Med 214,571
Allergy/Immune 212,200
Physiatry 202,400
Peds Heme/Onc 194,667
Neurology 192,000
Child Psychiatry 180,750
Infectious Disease 180,000
Rheumatology 177,429
Endocrinology 175,000
Occ Med 172,500
Hospitalist 171,500
Internal Medicine 169,714
Psychiatry 165,429
Pediatrics 154,857
Family Medicine 147,500
 
That's the first that I've seen pediatrics higher than Family Practice. I'm not complaining.
 
While filling out my lovely student loans, there was a calculator that gave an estimate of how much you need to make to pay off your student loans. Granted, this is paying them off in 15 years. With 200k indebt, the payments would be 1200$ and it claimed your income should be around 197k/yr...
 
While you have a valid point about taxes, a person's/household's expenses don't automatically go up because their income goes up.

If a physician making 200K/year goes into a grocery store at the same time as a secretary making 25K/year, do they get charged different prices for a pound of chicken? I think not.

Ability to save money depends on the sort of lifestyle one chooses. If you eat fillet mignon nightly, drive two Rolls Royces and send all of your kids to boarding school in Switzerland then, yes, it is hard to save anything on a 200K/year salary (whether before or after taxes). Everything you cut back on from there can go straight into whatever sort of investment vehicle you prefer.

While your logic appears sound, there's more to it then you think. For one, a physician and secretary may not get charged particularly different prices but if you factor in sales tax as a highly regressive tax, then technically the secretary is paying more. Secondly, as income increases, the propensity to save decreases, it's an increased income effect. For example when you make 75K/yr, theres an average propensity to save around 15k each yr, However, when you make 100k/yr the savings curve will be at around 10k per yr. This in turn makes 75k the more desirable salary for a person to have (from an economists standpoint). In short, its usually harder to save with the more money you make.
 
While your logic appears sound, there's more to it then you think. For one, a physician and secretary may not get charged particularly different prices but if you factor in sales tax as a highly regressive tax, then technically the secretary is paying more.

The point he was making was about absolute cost . . . not relative cost. With sales tax the secretary pays more as a percentage of income, but not more in an absolute sense.
 
The second and fourth highest paid employees of the UC system are in derm path, both taking in over $1.5 million a year. There it is; go for it.
 
Screw it, just pick a lifestyle field and get involved in business or investing on the side. To make a million or more look for opportunities in the healthcare industry at large, or at least at a hospital or healthcare network scale.

To do it purely through medicine, certain surgeries including plastic and some ortho, or the high end of radiology will be above the 1M mark.
 
I've always wondered about that...why is it that radiologists make so much money? They have an easier job compared to surgeons and such. Most of their work just deals with x-rays...

Also...if you don't mind me asking, what state do you live in? I know salaries are highly dependent on location.

The person that said plumbers make a lot of money...SO TRUE! My parents own two hotels and we have AC repair people, plumbers, and electricians who come in and charge anywhere from $80-$180 per hour!

YES, this is so fun-ny and true about plumbers.. I even heard an OB/GYn doc say "If I just did just the Gyn part then the plumber would make more then me"
 
Seriously, everyone is thinking this exact thought if you are in medical school. I don't want to hear those liberal whinings about the poor and all that crap. Everyone is concerned about their future bank account! So, we've worked hard for 4 years of school, and then (for surgery) like 6 to 7 years of residency and we want to make some money. If the system is socialized, the government will be in control of our wages as a whole. We cannot let that happen. What are some ideas to prevent that from happening as well as maximize our bank rolls?

I like money too,, especially a million.. But unlike years earlier I think this statement holds true... "You dont go into medicine for money, if you happen to make some along the way its good"
 
How to make a million dollars in medicine:

1) Graduate from Medical school

2) Realize there is no way you're going to make 1 mill unless you have a cash derm practice or inherit Dr. 90210 style plastic surgery practice (realize this turf will be lost to derm in 10 years). Cry and booze yourself to sleep.

3) Meet daughter of Sam Walton or Bill Gates. No more medicine. Become soccer dad.
 
Seriously, everyone is thinking this exact thought if you are in medical school. I don't want to hear those liberal whinings about the poor and all that crap. Everyone is concerned about their future bank account! So, we've worked hard for 4 years of school, and then (for surgery) like 6 to 7 years of residency and we want to make some money. If the system is socialized, the government will be in control of our wages as a whole. We cannot let that happen. What are some ideas to prevent that from happening as well as maximize our bank rolls?

MoneyDoc you must be related to kg062007.

Exhibit A: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?p=4888602#post4888602

Exhibit B: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=431831
 
Top