Why do doctors and lawyers make more money than physicists?

[Jeff Ford]

For the amount of training that Engineers and Scientists have, they should make as much or more than doctors do. Doctors in this country are WAYYYYYYY overpaid. Let's face it, people become doctors so they can get rich.

Some do. Others do it because they want to help people. The amount of sacrifice required to get a medical degree is pretty intense. They earn their pay. Also, they don't earn nearly as much as most people would think based on what they charge. Alot of that has to go towards covering malpractice insurance. That costs 10's of thousands per year.

 

[cscott]

I diubt they even have to take calculas.

Wrong. Most would have to taken calculus if they followed somewhat of a standard route to med school.

Calcuulus and physics, why would a doctor need Calculas and physics? Computer programmers don't even have to take that.

I'm beginning to feel you don't know what you're talking about.

Well doctors tend to... oh i dunno... save peoples lives?

So contributions like the transistor are of no value? If you mean scientists can't stay consistent, then you have a point.

For the amount of training that Engineers and Scientists have, they should make as much or more than doctors do.

How can you make this generalization? As an example, my father had 13 years of training (from undergrad on) to get to where he is now. How is that "much less" than engineers or scientists?

 

[Jeff Ford]

Be it medicine, science or legal tomfoolery, you shouldn't be pursuing any of it just becuase of how much money you'll make. That's the surest way to burnout and hating life. You should pursue these things becuase you're passionate about them.

 

[0rthodontist]

Ridiculous, cronxeh... maybe some scientists/engineers know fewer _facts_ but facts aren't real knowledge.

 

[Manchot]

Why were electric circuits and the behavoir of most of the simple components in those ICs invented? For economic relevance? Please.

The modern age would not exist if scientists had been required to justify themselves economically in the 1800s.

Well, most scientists in the 1800s didn't need to economically justify themselves because a) their research didn't cost nearly as much as modern science and b) many of them were rich as a result of old money. Moreover, I don't think that the IC is the best example to use, as its components were invented for financial gain. Bell Labs was looking for a solid state switch to replace the vacuum tube (which was approaching the limits of its usefulness), and from that, the transistor was born. Now, one could argue that resistors and capacitors weren't invented for monetary gain, but I find it hard to accept that one can "invent" a property intrinsic to a material (i.e., resistance and capacitance).

Are you high? Scientists/Engineers don't know the 1/10th of what an average physician is supposed to know. Get over it. Physicians are underpaid and lawyer are overpaid.

Scientists/engineers and physicians have completely different kinds of knowledge. Physicians have to do a lot of memorization, while physicists have to be better at analytical problem-solving. You can't compare the two types of knowledge: it's like apples and oranges.

 

[G01]

Scientists/engineers and physicians have completely different kinds of knowledge. Physicians have to do a lot of memorization, while physicists have to be better at analytical problem-solving. You can't compare the two types of knowledge: it's like apples and oranges.

Very good point

 

[cronxeh]

Scientists/engineers and physicians have completely different kinds of knowledge. Physicians have to do a lot of memorization, while physicists have to be better at analytical problem-solving. You can't compare the two types of knowledge: it's like apples and oranges.

Thats exactly something someone with little knowledge of medicine would say.

 

[cscott]

Thats exactly something someone with little knowledge of medicine would say.

Care to elaborate, or are we playing games?

 

[devious_]

Contrary to popular belief, physicians (especially diagnosticians) tend to have excellent problem solving skills. However, that is not to say that their analytical skills are in anyway superior to those of, say, mathematicians. Although I'm inclined to say that scientists/engineers are usually more proficient problem-solvers because of the prolonged training they've had and the pure nature of their fields, but I admit I am slightly biased. In the end, it's all very subjective.

 

[cronxeh]

Care to elaborate, or are we playing games?

Anastesiology is a purely analytical specialty, so is oncology, pharmacology, most of internal medicine, and not to mention radiology - which requires knowledge of mathematics (linear algebra/diff eq/topology) - at least an introductory level as well as nuclear physics.

It may seem like doctors only need to remember and catalog symptons, but if you have a few competing diseases in the system you won't get the right diagnosis unless you were thinking analytically. Most docs will not admit to you that they think in terms of differential equations and linear algebras - perhaps because they don't know they are, but once you know that math and then you study medicine you realize that you are in fact thinking analytically.

 

[Cyrus]

http://medschool.umaryland.edu/Epidemiology/masters_clinres.asp
http://medschool.umaryland.edu/admissions/curriculum_glance.asp


My friend wants to do medicine. He is biology undergrad. He does not have to take any of the math you listed cronxeh. And I don't see that on the med school list of courses. Can you explain what you mean by ' differential equations and linear algebras - perhaps because they don't know they are, but once you know that math and then you study medicine you realize that you are in fact thinking analytically.' How can they think in terms of linear algebra and differentail equations? One does not think in terms of differential equations unless trying to solve a specific differential equation via equations. How does making a diagnosis have do deal with diff equations?

 

[cronxeh]

http://medschool.umaryland.edu/Epidemiology/masters_clinres.asp
http://medschool.umaryland.edu/admissions/curriculum_glance.asp


My friend wants to do medicine. He is biology undergrad. He does not have to take any of the math you listed cronxeh. And I don't see that on the med school list of courses. Can you explain what you mean by ' differential equations and linear algebras - perhaps because they don't know they are, but once you know that math and then you study medicine you realize that you are in fact thinking analytically.' How can they think in terms of linear algebra and differentail equations? One does not think in terms of differential equations unless trying to solve a specific differential equation via equations. How does making a diagnosis have do deal with diff equations?

I don't know what your links are supposed to show, but whatever it was, you missing the point. Doctors know statistics, and great doctors also understand how to construct differential equations for physiological problems. Most of pharmacology and prescribing medicine requires you to think in terms of bioavailability and time-based dosaging. Its all diff eq. All of radiology is systems of linear diff eq's.

And by the way.. I hope your friend never becomes my doctor

 

[Cyrus]

But do the doctors actually set up and solve these equations, or do they refer to a formula that has been worked out by someone else and they simply plug and chug? Thinking in terms of math does not mean you are a skilled mathematician. The point of my link was based on the fact that you said

which requires knowledge of mathematics (linear algebra/diff eq/topology) - at least an introductory level as well as nuclear physics.

But I don't see any real need to know these topics at a level of understanding of a math major in order to take any of the courses to become a doctor.

 

[Cyrus]

http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/admissions/apps.html

I still don't see admissions requirements in any of the areas of math you gave. Can you provide me with a link where it is used, I would be curious to know.

Mathematics-Calculus or Statistics, one year (6 to 8 semester hours) Advanced Placement credit for calculus, acceptable to the student’s undergraduate college, may be used in fulfillment of one semester of the Hopkins’ math requirement.

And by the way.. I hope your friend never becomes my doctor

...okay...

 

[Line]

To sum it up physicists work really hard. It's probrabl one of the most demanding fields on the mind. And if you go to he University Of Houston's website and lookup Computer Information Systems you'll see that they don't have to take any Math.

And whoever the idot was that said scientests don't make contributions to society needs to wear a dunce hat. It's a great plague of our country people don't know what scientests do have done for them.If you took away all the work of scientests you wouldn't even have a wheel and fire. You'd have no tools and just live out on the prairie all day eating fruits and bugs before you take a dump. You wouldn't even be cavemen.

ANd scientests might not always have results that are imediatly economically viable but engineers and technologists do. With all their immense importantance and hard work all they topped out at was $100,000 a year.

 

[inha]

And whoever the idot was that said scientests don't make contributions to society needs to wear a dunce hat. It's a great plague of our country people don't know what scientests do have done for them.If you took away all the work of scientests you wouldn't even have a wheel and fire. You'd have no tools and just live out on the prairie all day eating fruits and bugs before you take a dump. You wouldn't even be cavemen.

You should try to understand marlon's point before you call him an idiot. That way you wouldn't sound like one in the process. Even in your post the keyword is "were". What was done has nothing to do with what contemporary physicists should earn in money and recognition. And it didn't take scientists to invent the wheel or fire.

I probably will not discover anything that'll improve the everyman's life. Neither will you. The vast majority of us will spend our working lives fiddling with stuff that won't get us recognition beyound our close collagues and most definelty will not contribute anything to society. What we do simply is not that important.

 

[0rthodontist]

I looked on the university of houston site but couldn't find any major called "computer information systems." I did find "information systems technology" and they do have to take calculus. Yes it does seem to be a math-weak major though.

If we are comparing the problem solving abilities of doctors and physicists, why not compare their IQ's?

 

[Nothing000]

Look at sports as well. Yes they provide entertainment, but the amount of money athletes get is preposterous. That money could be helping a lot better causes.

I think it should be mandatory for everyone in the NBA and NFL to give one fourth of their sallary to a charity of their choice. Why doesn't the owner of one of these major sports leagues make a rule like that? Is there single owners of entire leagues? If there are I think they should make some sort of rule like that. These guys don't need to be making 50 million dollars a year.

 

[Nothing000]

We've discussed this before, physicsts aren't the highest paid proffesionals. Well to look at matters more, neither are engineers,programers,technogis or scientests.

Engineers get paid pretty good.

 

[Manchot]

I probably will not discover anything that'll improve the everyman's life. Neither will you. The vast majority of us will spend our working lives fiddling with stuff that won't get us recognition beyound our close collagues and most definelty will not contribute anything to society. What we do simply is not that important.

That's the problem. People can see the immediate effects of doctors' work: they save lives. They can see the immediate effects of lawyers' work: they get me money, save my money, prosecute, and defend. Even Thomas Edison, the man who "invented" the light bulb gets recognition. However, most things created by engineers/physicists nowadays most likely won't have immediate applications. Moreover, people don't understand the significance of the items. I mean, if you go on the street and ask people who John Bardeen or Jack Kilby is, 99.9% of people won't have any idea. If you tell them that those two men are perhaps more responsible than anyone else for computers smaller than a room, they'll probably wonder why they've never heard of them.

 

[Mulder]

I think it should be mandatory for everyone in the NBA and NFL to give one fourth of their sallary to a charity of their choice. Why doesn't the owner of one of these major sports leagues make a rule like that?

Becuase it infringes on human rights?

 

[ludi_srbin]

All modern society isn't about sports. Many countrues around the world take great interest in Science&Technology like Germany and Japan.

As for The States, we've got a lot of work to be done.

And although they take mocrobiology I doubt a dcotor's collegiate schooling is as hard as a physicist's.

Trust me doctors have to study A LOT! I don't know if you ever saw their anatomy books and how detailed that crap is. I would bet that it takes just as much studying to become a doctor as to become a Physics Profesor. Lawyers? Well in my oppinion they are an important part of our society since they take care that everyone gets equal chance before the law, but their jobs are way overrated. Now I agree with you. Engineering and Science are not as well paid as they should be. I just looked at my course catalog in Electrical Engineering, and I"M SCARED! I can only imagine what awaits me in the next 6 years, and for what? For some 50,000-60,000 per year. I mean it really isn't fair since if I fail in calculating something or designing people could die, and a lot of bad stuff could happen. I will have the same responsability as any doctor, not to mention a lawyer. But again, we are more than welcomed to go into the law and become insanily rich lawyers whose life is centered arround volumes of book of boring crap. When I think of their sleepless nights of going through some boring legalities I feel better.

 

[Rayne]

re

I think it should be mandatory for everyone in the NBA and NFL to give one fourth of their sallary to a charity of their choice. Why doesn't the owner of one of these major sports leagues make a rule like that?

USA=Free Market=Voluntary Exchange of goods?

 

[0rthodontist]

I can't imagine that being a physicist is easier than being a doctor. Isn't physics just about the most competitive field in academia?

 

[Rayne]

My guess is Physics is more esoteric academically and harder to grasp but the daily grind and stress and workhours of being a Doctor exceeds that of being a Physicist, on average.

As far as salary goes though isn't it based on supply-demand? Is there some kind of federal price floor on wages of Doctors at public hospitals that artificially keeps their salary high?

I know some nurses are making outragious salaries compared to Doctors and Science professionals because they are in high demand...

 

[0rthodontist]

I'm willing to bet that the average professor of physics is 10 or 20 IQ points above the average medical doctor.

 

[ludi_srbin]

I'm willing to bet that the average professor of physics is 10 or 20 IQ points above the average medical doctor.

No doubt, however there are a lot more doctors than physics professors.

 

[G01]

Knowing Engineers, Scientists and Doctors, and Lawyers personally, I've come to the conclusion that all have a heck of a lot of studying to do. Yes they study different things, but is one really easier than the other? I know some biology majors who say they hate physics and can't stand it. I as a physics major couldn't even imagine going to med school. It sounds crazy. Lawyers also work hard i think, but their job is different, instead of focusing on analytical problem solving, their main focus is on argument, convincing others of their point of view. In order to do this they do have to know a lot of information to back up their argument, and they must be credible and intelligent.

In conclusion, all of these different fields require a hell of a lot of work, but in different areas. Physcists and engineers in math and problem solving. Doctors, in problem solving(curing diseases, they do have to apply all that stuff they have to memorize you know) and in knowledge of medicine. Lawyers in law and the skill of argument.

Also, this talk about how physicists are more important, or doctors are more important is nuts. Heres some advice. If your planning on being a doctor or lawyer or scientist just so you can feel for important than other people, then don't do it. You will be dissapointed when you find out that your not. A doctor would have a hard time without the MRIs, etc supplyed by physicsts and engineers. And the engineers would have a hard time developing technology without doctors who keep them alive long enough to make anything important. And neither of these groups could function without someone to speak for them (a lawyer), and protect them from others who would want to take advantage of them etc.

This is the reason we have these different areas of study. No one could possible do all these things themselves.

 

[Poop-Loops]

I'm willing to bet that the average professor of physics is 10 or 20 IQ points above the average medical doctor.

Too bad IQ doesn't mean anything, huh? Or else you might have actually had something there.

You can't compare doctors to scientists. If a scientist doesn't keep up with the world around him, he can't do anything (related to his field) and drops out of the race. A doctor can just open up a clinic.

I went to a doctor once with a bad knee. He told me not to squat down or do anything that involves bending it for about 10 years (my injury wasn't very bad and you see athletes back in the game not even a year later. That's because they REHAB it, not just sit around). Wow, that was really worth my $300. Next, I went to a dentist that fudged 3 or 4 of my teeth and now I need root canals. Awesome.

But, the GOOD doctors do keep up with everything. It's just that there is no real incentive to be a good doctor.

What do you call someone who graduates at the top of their class in medical school? A doctor. What do you call someone who graduates at the bottom of their class in medical school? A doctor. What do you call someone who graduates at the top of their class in um... physics school...? A physicist. What do you call someone who graduates at the bottom of their class in physics school? Unemployed.

That being said, doctors aren't exactly stupid. They get payed more, sure, but they aren't brain dead. They still had to take a lot of hard classes to get to where they are.

It's all about supply and demand. People get sick all the time, so they go to the doctor. Physics on the other hand, just keeps getting harder and harder and there hasn't been a breakthrough in a while.

Science has never been about the money. Rich people way back when didn't do science because they wanted to have more money, but because they liked it. Galileo didn't piss of the church because he wanted more money, but because he knew science was right.

I understand that it seems like a bleak future, to spend so much time and effort and have little to show for it. But it's not about doing to get something, but doing for the sake of doing.

 

[0rthodontist]

What is your point? That physicists should or should not get paid more?

I know that human society could get along without doctors. But it could never function without engineers and physicists. I guess you're agreeing that the average physicist has stronger credentials to do physics than the average doctor has to practice medicine, but I don't see where you stand.