For older professionals, do you value money, or intellectual stimulation?

[httpvalid]

The trouble is that the people that pay you generally *hate* long winded Talmudic discussions. They want the answer to be X, and they are paying to see how you can get the answer to be X.

I have no problem with dissecting complicate passages, or drafting highly detailed documents. Those are fun things i normally like to do. This is the chief reason i would excel at law schools if i ever want to go.

I don ` t like top law firms precisely because people needing the "right" answer for every complicated question. They probably would distort the interpretation to fit the benefit of their firm. This really kills it at an intellectual level for me.

There is another point i didn `t bring up, but it is just as, if not more important to me. It is need to do "no harm". I care for money, but don ` t think i can take money if it comes from doing harm. It does seem like stupidity, and "not caring for anyone" comes hand in hand. I am not good around these peoples.

 

[httpvalid]

I don't really have much to add to the discussion other than, in areas of life wisdom, business and finance, twofish should be listened to closely. Maybe it is too late for this, but why do you want to (or seemingly have some sort of need to) make 200K/yr? What made you come to that conclusion? Why do you value money so much? You can make 80K a year and live completely comfortable, that isn't even to say that you will simply sustain and live frugally, you can have a decent amount of options with 80K, especially if you are single. Beyond that, there is always room (well not necessarily always) for improvement, but to insist that you need to and will be making 200K/yr by 30 despite what people tell you is stupid. If you don't like what people are saying, all the worse for you. Not to mention your "counting your eggs before they hatch" by making the assumption that simply because your test scores are good, you'll be accepted to some top 10 school. There are many many many people with good scores, and the top 10 acceptance process isn't completely lineal "If you get good grades and test scores then you get accepted to top 10" This isn't the case, it is a matter of many other factors included, this is due to simple economic considerations of supply/demand among other things. Life requires sacrifice, either sacrifice your notion of 200K or sacrifice your notion of stimulating. That isn't to say the two are simply incompatible, but assuming these notions are immediatley compatible is wrong. Especially considering the only options you have presented and have been presented for good salary i.e. law&medicine you have stated that you do not like and do not find stimulating. Your restaraunt also falls under that category, so maybe business? Probably falls under that category also Ahhhh well of course stimulating, how about an engineer or a physicist? Nope, you can forget that 200K, so where are you now?

I think your chief concern is about my "motivation" of wanting to earning 20K per year( tax free?). One reason is that "i can". My parents are making that kind of money, and they say, they want to give the business to me. In the long term, I can probable increase the profit margin, and expand the business. I will never be able to work as a doctor, or lawyer making that much money. If my only interest is money, i would take my parents offer, but i am seriously interested in the life of the mind. I love solving puzzles, math problems, philosophy and reading Talmudic discussion. I am not smart, but i have confidence of reaching the top of any field i choose. If my parents were poor, i would not have any dilemma.

 

[Ryker]

I have no problem with dissecting complicate passages, or drafting highly detailed documents. Those are fun things i normally like to do. This is the chief reason i would excel at law schools if i ever want to go.

Law isn't only about dissecting complicate passages or drafting highly detailed documents, a lot of times what makes a great lawyer great is the ability to look at the bigger picture. Any lay person is able to dissect passages, but you study law to go beyond that.

I don`t like top law firms precisely because people needing the "right" answer for every complicated question. They probably would distort the interpretation to fit the benefit of their firm. This really kills it at an intellectual level for me.

This isn't the case with only top law firms. From my personal experience of working in a law firm I found this to be even more true in smaller ones, because they cannot afford to lose clients, so they must cater even more to their whims. On the other hand, top law firms can usually afford to stick to their morals (not that lawyers have any, but for argument's sake :D), and need only to give in when it comes to really large companies that make offers they just can't refuse. And even then it's basically a choice between making heaps and heaps of money versus making heaps and heaps and heaps of money.

In any case, don't think it's all fun and games when it comes to law, and I can tell you it will suck big time if you don't love it.

 

[JDStupi]

Wait, I don't get the point of this whole thread. If you just told me that you want to make more money because you can, but at the same time, it isn't just about the money and that you don't care because you like thinking and so you want to do that. So what's the question? What's the topic? If you don't care and want to do something involving thinking, then go do something involving thinking. Because if you really like thinking, you won't worry about making $x. I don't see that this is after all a question that warrants a thread, this seems to be a personal question that you need to sort out completely on your own and nothing we say is going to do anything. We can say "Oh well your misinformed about law or field x" But that doesn't matter. I just don't see the point in all of this, if you came here asking for advice , that is great. But if you argue with advice, and refuse to take any of it, then what is the point? "I want to be stimulated and make 200K/yr", ok that is a statement. "How do I do this?". Answers were given, you don't like them. And regarding my asking you why you want to make that money, forget it I suppose because your motivations are set, but why did you say, "BEcause I can?" Because the point is, is that you can if you go to your parents business, but if you don't it means that you might not be able to. So is the whole question "Should I inherit my parents business and work hard to increase the profit margin and make at least 200K/yr, or since I like thinking should I go into another field without the guarantee that I will make that much money?" Because people tried to tell you that second part, and you argued saying that you'll be able to have your cake and eat it too, not necesarrily. The question is personal, see if you'll be satisfied making money and being intellectually stimulated in your spare time, and if you are 100% dedicated towards doing something intellectual and making lots of money, then go gather your interests and create your own niche.

 

[Locrian]

I just don't see the point in all of this, if you came here asking for advice , that is great. But if you argue with advice, and refuse to take any of it, then what is the point?

To argue.

 

[fss]

You are so bad in absorbing details is amazing, and not to mention a complete in inability to spot the main point.

Your question is essentially meaningless, and you are apparently not intelligent enough to make your own decision. Instead, you ask internet strangers their opinion so you have someone to blame if their interests don't end up matching yours.

Did I leave anything out? You seem to be missing the fundamental fact that what makes others happy doesn't necessarily make you happy.

The fallacy is similar to:

1. There is a probability of .5 that a coin flip is head.

For a fair coin, this is absolutely the case. Unless this is another one of those examples in which "the numbers don't tell the entire story" or some other similarily vague and covering statement that you seem to favor.

Base on 1, it is wrong to say "the next coin flip is a head".

Nobody said this. If someone did, they would be wrong. Applied to your situation, the probability of you making $200k right out of law/med school is decidedly less than 50% (as evidenced in the graph provided by D H), so while the statement "You will not make $200k after graduation" is not valid, the statement "You probably will not make $200k after graduation" certainly is.

The graph is not sufficient to "inform".

Nor is saying "I think I can do it." Sometimes reality gets in the way of one's hopes and dreams. Evidence has been presented that the majority of new law and medical school graduates do not make your target salary right out of law or medical school. This isn't really a groundbreaking way to present relevant information...

Being in a physics, math forum, you sure have difficulty understanding basic probability.

And yet you're the one that expects to make $200k by 30 when you haven't even passed law or medical school, much less the bar or residency. What was that about probability?

 

[renz]

I am trying to understand this thread.So I think the question is you are trying to decide between choosing a carrier path that would make a lot of money (restaurant) or one that is intellectually stimulating (philosophy/physics). And you want to ask people who has been working for a long time what they think is more important, or what is more satisfying? I think I understand the point of the question. Some people I know who choose to do what they enjoy (without big pay) sometimes say that if they can choose again they would rather make a lot of money. I can't answer this for you because I am just at the beginning stage of working. It gets complicated if you try to compromise the two and choose a middle ground I guess.
Considering lawyer/doctor as a compromise. The money is not as great as restaurant business, but it is still better than academia. It should be more intellectually stimulating, but from what I've read it's not interesting enough for you anyway. So if you are not willing to compromise both criteria then why not just toss this option out?
(although this makes me wonder about doctors who do medical research, how is the pay like? Or maybe something in medical physics)

Another compromise would be to do both but not at the same time. If you want a lot of money then do the restaurant business for few years, then go into academia.

Or of course if you want to have both at the same time (and right away?) you will have to figure out how.

 

[turbo]

If you don't understand how and why your parents became successful restaurateurs and how they make their business decisions, you will crash and burn shortly after they turn the place over to you. That is one tough field to be successful and stay successful, and it requires a lot of diligence, business-smarts, and the ability to take calculated risks to see how the changes might impact your business and keep your balance.

I don't want to rain on your parade, but there are very few people who manage to crack the $200K/year barrier before middle-age (relatively young) unless they were born on third base.