You need to introduce me to your broker. If I accumulate either of those amounts in my bank account I will be shocked. Lose two zeros on each of those figures, perhaps.
If you plan on reaching retirement age and only having 100K saved, you are either starting work at a SIGNIFICANTLY older age than most, or you're just plain spending too much damn money.
For the record, I'm an ME, and I think it was obvious that the payroll numbers I was expressing for engineers was that of employed engineers, not private contractors. As far as money goes, let me put it this way. While I was in college, I made less than $30K per year. I lived alone in a nice apartment (no one sharing the rent), I ate out often, I purchased a new car (VW Jetta, I'll grant you it's not a Bentley
🙂), I had health and comprehensive auto insurance, and I purchased books for school. I had cable, broadband net access, and plenty of the other little niceties of life. I was also able to save enough money to purchase an engagement ring with a diamond you can actually see. By the end of college, I had about $10K saved up in the bank (10% of L2D's hopes and dreams for retirement, apparently.) You just have to spend money on what matters to you, and not waste money on what doesn't.
As far as the earlier comments about why 100K doesn't stretch much further than the 'other people's' 50K, it's a load. The argument was basically, "100K doesn't stretch as far as 50K because if you make 100K you have the money to move into a bigger house closer to the city, upgrade your car, eat out more, save more, buy nicer things, let your spouse quit his/her job, and hire a maid." Ok, the maid was my own addition. But really, you can't tell me 100K doesn't stretch much farther than 50K for the sole reason of YOU SPEND ALL THE EXTRA ON NICER STUFF! That's plain rediculous. The fact is, if you suddenly get a raise from 50K to 100K per year, that's in the ballpark of an extra 25K per year of spendable money. Why in the world would you assume that you have to immediately go out and buy a newer, more expensive car, and a bigger house closer to the city? What's wrong with your old house? What's wrong with the car you're driving now? The problem here is the assumption that by saying "docs make good money" I'm really saying "docs are exorbitantly wealthy and can live a life of absolute luxury." That's not correct. You can't have it all (at that price anyway). I know plenty of people who make 50-75K per year, who drive nice cars but don't upgrade every year or two years, who live in nice houses but not mansions, who go on nice vacations to nice places but not 2 week cruise tours of the mediterranean every year, and who have families and kids who are not wanting for anything. These people also do not live in NYC, or Chicago, or L.A. You don't HAVE to live in the big city, ya know. But if you want to, well, you have to trade off something. If 95% of the population is living on less money, either we're living in a land of poverty or those people aren't wasting their money like some of the complainers here are. And yes, I know someone implied earlier that they ARE living in poverty, but that person was full of crap.
I think that if you're a career changer who was making 6 figures before, you have to be willing to downgrade your lifestyle considerably to go to med school. That doesn't mean you're not gonna come out making nothing in the end, it just means you accepted an opportunity cost to do something more interesting. If you were making 100K+ before school and you plan on intering primary care, obviously you're not going to get much of a raise. But if you were making 100K+ before school, you also did not stop your prior education at a B.S. in Bio
🙂 Let's look at those opportunity cost calcs for an engineer again, and I'll use myself as an example. In the particular engineering job I could have accepted, I'd have netted 35-40K per year after taxes in years 1-4. I'm assuming a total tax burden of 30%, not going to bother looking up the real rates. Years 5-7 I'll give myself 55K per year, I'm assuming I was really aggressive and made it into some of the upper positions. So now I'm $315K in the hole. Add in 150K in loans I'm taking out for school, and I'm 465K in the hole. Subtract my approximately 90K I'll net in 3 years of residency and that comes out to an opportunity cost of 375K by the first day post residency. This is significantly higher than the cost to someone who did not leave undergrad with a professional degree, which is the situation for the majority of med students. Now, my hypothetical engineering job is pretty much capped at this point, so I'd still be netting 55K per year after that. But now I'm working as an FP grossing 140K (I'm using the average so I don't have to scale as the years go by), which after tax should be around 80K. So, I'm now on top of the situation by 25K per year. At that rate, I break even (excluding debt repayment) in 15 years. Am I really only planning to work for 15 years? That's 43 years old for the typical 4 year-4year-3 year education plan. If you work till you're 50, that's 175K ahead of not going to med school. If you work till you're 60, that's 425K ahead. Not too shabby, especially considering you've probably been taking 3-4 weeks per year vacation MORE than you would have as the employed engineer, who works a similar # of hours per week. So in this hypothetical, if the doc maintains the same lifestyle as the engineer, by retirement he's got half a million dollars MORE saved, assuming a 0% return on investment. if the doc decides to live a nicer lifestyle (remember the engineer is quite comfortable, so maybe this equates to having some "extravagances"?), he winds up with less saved, but probably still ahead in savings. And keep in mind this is pretty much the low end for physicians. If you go into anything other than peds, FP, or a low paying area of IM, you're going to do better than this. Also, most people will not do as well as the hypothetical engineer outside of medicine.
I say again, the money's there, maybe not in buckets, but you're gonna have plenty to buy toys with. The biggest financial drawback to medicine really is the delayed gratification aspect. I think if we could bring med school tuition costs down to the level of undergrad tuition, and maybe implement a 6 year BS/MD type program as the standard (do you REALLY need a B.S. first to be a doc, other than as a backup in case you fail?), then all the whining will have to dry up pretty quickly, as people will have lost their last excuse as to why they 'need' 300K to survive in this tough world.