Why do doctors and lawyers make more money than physicists?

[Plastic Photon]

I know a lawyer who has a PhD in chemistry and he is paid exceptionally low compared to a friend of mine who is a corporate attorney. Another friend of mine is also pursuing corporate law; his (future) internship alone is obligated to pay him easily $50k+. Most likely he will finish law school and find his first job's starting salary at $180k.

The point of this being: if you want to make money as a lawyer, do not practice family law!

The problem with science being 'unimportant' is the waiting...may have to wait decades before a lab discovery is turned into a consumer product, industrial application, etc. That is too long and sometimes uncomprehendable to the general public. We talk about this sort of topic in one of my classes at school, and the whining always begins 'Why is so much money spent on science.' or 'Why do we give so much money to NASA?' The last is a good question, too much job security there if you ask me, but the first question I think is relevant:

The general public is not interested with math or science. I cannot begin to describe the semester of College Algebra I took. I have never heard so much whinning and *****ing going on over something as simple as an introduction to synthetic division. "This doesn't make any sense", "why can't he (professor) explain it better", "He might as well be speaking French." Please! Take 30 minutes out of the day when you get off school to study!

If the last hundred years of discoveries and advances in physics isn't enough to encourage the general population to at least pursue introduction Uni Physics (not saying everyone needs to know physics), then nothing can! I think it is quite impossible.

Therefore, people do not have respect for physics other than that they found math hard in college.

 

[0rthodontist]

All in all though engineers and physicists are not paid poorly... compare them, for example, to sociologists. They are just paid poorly when compared to doctors and lawyers (and in my state, Massachusetts, I read a couple years ago that the average lawyer makes less than the average programmer, about $75k). Doctors do make too much, but it's not like $200k usually... it is rare that a doctor will make that much. It depends of course though. Engineers and computer science majors are the highest paid after college graduation, though perhaps they lag behind doctors who have had medical school.

I think physicists are paid much too less for the skills they have and the caliber of people they compete with. But they do well compared with the general population if they have a professorship.

 

[Poop-Loops]

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.

My point is that doctors aren't stupid as some people here tried to say.

Human society get along without doctors? Ever hear of this place called "Africa"? They don't have many doctors there and look how they're doing...

I'm also saying that in science you have to be GOOD to survive, in medicine you can survive anywhere because you are ALWAYS NEEDED. Which goes back to society surviving without doctors... if we didn't need them, there wouldn't be such a (here is the key word) need for them.

Are engineers and physicists not as important? Hell no. It's just not black and white as you like to see it. You need all of it, otherwise there wouldn't be a need for those people.

Doctors get payed more because a lot of them set their own salary by opening their own clinics. Engineers usually work for corporations who set them their salary. Want more money? Make an uprising. Make it so that physicists and engineers are NEEDED.

 

[0rthodontist]

Africa has few doctors but I don't think it has much of anything else either. You can't say Africa's problems are based on the lack of doctors. Aggravated, somewhat, but certainly not based.

Doctors just help people live longer. Without doctors, people would die sooner and in more pain. Life would otherwise go on exactly as normal. First-world countries would still be first-world countries, with cars, cellphones, computers, bridges, the works. Without engineers and scientists we would all be third world Africa.

"Doctors are smarter than you think" doesn't follow from what you said. Let me summarize some of your points:
1. Your doctor was unable to help your knee despite established rehab procedures that would do just that.
2. Your dentist fudged 3 or 4 of your teeth.
3. It would be nice if we had more good doctors, but there is no real incentive to be a good doctor.
4. There are significant numbers of practicing doctors who graduated at the bottom of their class.

These are the things YOU said. I know you tempered them by saying doctors have to take a lot of hard courses, but still.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Yeah, the doctors screwed me over. Does that mean they are stupid? Or that doctors in general are stupid? I've been to more doctors in my life that have helped me than to those that have hurt me.

Without doctors, our life expectancy would still be around 30 years. What can you accomplish in 30 years? Not much.

 

[0rthodontist]

Without doctors, our life expectancy would still be around 30 years. What can you accomplish in 30 years? Not much.

No it wouldn't. Most of the increased lifespan is due to better nutrition and sanitation. In the past those at the top of the social ladder who had access to those things but not to reputable doctors, always lived lives that were comparable in length to modern lives, by which I mean fifty or sixty years.

 

[Poop-Loops]

And who do you think figured out that sanitation and nutrition is important?

 

[0rthodontist]

Biologists, statisticians, medical scientists. Doctors aren't researchers.

 

[Poop-Loops]

You can't be serious...

 

[0rthodontist]

Doctors sometimes do research on the side, but their main business--what makes them doctors--is practicing medicine. Neurosurgeons are not neurobiologists. Doctors use science, they don't create it. In the absence of doctors we would have a well developed medical theory; research does not require practice. Epidemiology would be hindered for lack of data, but there are other ways of gathering data than from doctors, for example from surveys and inspectors.

In any case, all it takes to live a full lifetime for most people is a good diet and reasonable sanitation. Additional people would die from curable diseases, like appendicitis. But society would continue as it does now.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Why would we study medicine if we weren't going to practice it in the first place?

 

[0rthodontist]

Well, this appears to be heading in circles. We would study human biology for the purpose of prevention, i.e. nutrition, exercise, sanitation.

If you're trying to say that we would not study human biology in general--with applications to biotech, for example--as deeply if there were not doctors, this argument seems rather inessential to the work value of doctors. That doctors indirectly provide incentive for biologists is not part of what the job of being a doctor is, so it doesn't change their work value. In any case if biologists weren't studying human biology as much then they might be scientists in other disciplines, which might then be more advanced, so it's a double edged sword.

My point is that doctors are not essential to human progress, while engineers and scientists are. Doctors make life a lot nicer but they do not advance the state of civilization.

 

[pivoxa15]

I haven't followed all the discussion but one way a pure scientist could make big money is by writing books or movies for the general public. But offcourse you would have to be very good to do that. I think more scientists are doing this than ever (espeically physicists). This is (pretty much) the only way pure scientists can become multi-millionares.

So they have the advantage that what they do is genuinely interesting (and profit from it by telling others about it). It is harder for the practical doctors or lawyers to do this.

 

[Poop-Loops]

My point is that doctors are not essential to human progress, while engineers and scientists are. Doctors make life a lot nicer but they do not advance the state of civilization.

Living longer and without pain IS an advance in civilization.

So, pivoxa15, you're saying that in order for physicists to make more money is to do something other than physics? Super.

 

[0rthodontist]

Yes, the medical system is an advance in civilization, but it does not itself advance civilization. If scientists are potters, doctors are vases.

 

[pivoxa15]

So, pivoxa15, you're saying that in order for physicists to make more money is to do something other than physics? Super.

Well not necessarily, look at Penrose with his philosophy of mind books and 'road to reality' which contains some science. But you do have some point.

Normally an academic physicist would need to do research and teach. I guess a really good one might have the option of doing research and write. So instead of teaching, they write popular science books that are related to their field of research. The scientists themselves might learn something as well especially if they are branching to something new. For example, Hawking surely would have learned something new in math as a result of his book 'God created the Integers'. This new information might help him with his physics research in the future.

Another thing is that science is empirical in nature so it will benefit the theorists to write books for the general public because not only will their experimental collegues be able to learn (I guess it is difficult for them to read every article in theoretical journals) but scientists in other fields will also benefit from reading it and potentially write back to the theorists with new ideas. Hence increasing awareness in science (especially the fundalmental topics) is always good. However, this route might not be so good for a first class pure mathematican where pure uninterrupted research is often first priority - anything else is pure distraction.

 

[Poop-Loops]

You're a pothead. :P

Doctors let scientists live longer. You think Einstein would have developed all of his theories if he had died at the age of 20 due to the flue or some other trivial disease we scoff at these days?

 

[Poop-Loops]

Well not necessarily, look at Penrose with his philosophy of mind books and 'road to reality' which contains some science. But you do have some point.

Normally an academic physicist would need to do research and teach. I guess a really good one might have the option of doing research and write. So instead of teaching, they write popular science books that are related to their field of research.

Another thing is that science is empirical in nature so it will benefit the theorists to write books for the general public because not only will their experimental collegues be able to learn (I guess it is difficult for them to read articles in theoretical journals) but scientists in other fields will also benefit from reading it and potentially write back to the theorists with new ideas. Hence increasing awareness in science (especially the fundalmental topics) is always good. However, this route might not be so good for a first class pure mathematican where pure uninterrupted research is often first priority - anything else is pure distraction.

The only way I see a scientist every becoming rich is if he or she starts their own business (like my current chem instructor did, before deciding he likes teaching more than money) or invent something on their own.

 

[pivoxa15]

The only way I see a scientist every becoming rich is if he or she starts their own business (like my current chem instructor did, before deciding he likes teaching more than money) or invent something on their own.

The business better be science related but what you're suggesting is for practical scientists.

I was suggesting how theorists is able to make big money. Although only the famous theorists is able to take this route hence only a few by definition. Incidently they are also the people who do not need money due to their already high salary which is similar to a good doctor or lawyer.

 

[Plastic Photon]

All in all though engineers and physicists are not paid poorly... compare them, for example, to sociologists.

Sociologist is someone who never left kindregarten. The other day (in sociology class) people were allowed to do their stand up comedy and tell other joke, discuss their family and talk about celebrities! Who pays someone to talk about Oprah! I can do that for free: I hate Oprah. In fact, I do it some more: Oprah is conceited. Wooo!

Sociologist study groups, so I guess they should start studying why all the groups of people around them make considerably more.

 

[Plastic Photon]

You're a pothead. :P

Doctors let scientists live longer. You think Einstein would have developed all of his theories if he had died at the age of 20 due to the flue or some other trivial disease we scoff at these days?

I guess the debate will never end...where would current medical technology and medicine be without scientist? Did medical doctors discovery x-rays, radiation, doublehelix bond of DNA, hyperdermic needles, stethoscopes...?

 

[Manchot]

I guess the debate will never end...where would current medical technology and medicine be without scientist? Did medical doctors discovery x-rays, radiation, doublehelix bond of DNA, hyperdermic needles, stethoscopes...?

No. And they also didn't discover most of the medicines they use: researchers did.

Doctors let scientists live longer. You think Einstein would have developed all of his theories if he had died at the age of 20 due to the flue or some other trivial disease we scoff at these days?

Most of our increased life expectancy is due to increased sanitation and the vaccines you are given as a child (again, which are developed by researchers, not practicing medical doctors). The reason that life expectancy used to be so low was because of a high child mortality rate. Once you reached the age of 5 or so, your chances of living to 50 or 60 was fairly great. (There is a reason that you don't see many 20 year olds dying from the flu, but you do see more children and the elderly doing so.)

 

[Poop-Loops]

So you people are saying doctors don't contribute anything to society?

 

[gyroverse]

Everybody can't be the master of all trades and that's probably why we live in society .Its not about who contributes or not because doctors and scientists both contribute to society in their own specific ways but I think we are wandering off the topic of this discussion .People don't go into research for money but that should definitely be a part of the package...because I've always felt that scientist contribute the most to society i guess other people just don't realize it now.

 

[phun]

So you people are saying doctors don't contribute anything to society?

Yes they do. Just like plumbers contribute to society by fixing toilets, doctors (those who do not contribute to scientific research) contribute to society by fixing whatever is wrong with your body. Otherwise we wouldn't be paying them all that money.

In fact, we think they contribute so much to our society that we'd have to pay them hundreds of dollors for showing their pretty faces and saying "you are going to be fine" when 4th year medical school students do the actual work.

That said, I think well-established physicists are getting paid enough to live comfortably. Most physicists I've seen are so dedicated to their research that they wouldn't have enough time to spend the extra money even if they got paid better. What's more important to them is how much research money they get -- which can be way more than what most doctors get paid.

One last point. I wonder how popular pre-med track would be if doctors' salleries were capped at 100k by law -- 100k is enough to live comfortably by any measure.

 

[Manchot]

So you people are saying doctors don't contribute anything to society?

I'm saying that they don't contribute nearly as much as the medical researchers do. (And yet, they get paid more.)

 

[TMFKAN64]

I think the number one idea that many of you need to drop is the idea that pay in any way reflects the value of work. Perhaps it should, in an ideal world... but in the real world that we all have to live in, pay reflects supply and demand, nothing more.

If you really want to raise the pay of physicists, form a union.

 

[Line]

My simple point is that scientests are just as important than doctors. However 1 scientest take Einstein was far more important that your general doctor.

My pint is even if the have to study exactly as much physicist have to study harder. I mean we both study calculas but will they ever use it?

ANd as for scientests not innventing fire or the wheel while it's not modern technology it is technology. True you may or may not call stoneage inventors scientests but they were the stoneage equivelants.

Doctors mostly repair things,scientests discover and invent things which is far more contributions.

Oh and on the bad rep scientests get,we still do. All throughout Modern Western Civilization scientests have been seen as geeks,loosers,and psycopaths. All you have to do as look at the early 20th movies liek Frankenstein to see just what I'm talking about. Dr.Frankenstein is potrayed as this weird wide-eyed MAD SCIENTEST whom like to cut people up and use their parts with wild hair screaming "It's Alive!". They even have twisted plots to take over the world. Even in the 90s we get the dork Steve Urkell. The maniac scientests still existed in the 90s with The Doc in Back To The Future.Doctors on the other hand are potrayed nicely and even get seen has handsome guys with great social lives. And if you don't know what I'm talking about by ruling the world just watch Pinky And The Brain.

 

[Poop-Loops]

The whole "scientists are geeks and beyond normal humans" probably really started around the time of the Manhattan Project, where everything was kept hush-hush. You're right, though. Every time I tell someone I'm a physics major (and I don't boast about it, I just answer their question), they tell me "Oh... you're one of those smart people..." but in a way that makes me feel bad, as if I'm doing something wrong.

 

[franznietzsche]

The whole "scientists are geeks and beyond normal humans" probably really started around the time of the Manhattan Project, where everything was kept hush-hush. You're right, though. Every time I tell someone I'm a physics major (and I don't boast about it, I just answer their question), they tell me "Oh... you're one of those smart people..." but in a way that makes me feel bad, as if I'm doing something wrong.

You're not supposed to tell them about the awful man-ape chimera hybrids you're genetically engineering using equipment built from tossed out 1980s boomboxes in your basement La-bor-a-tor-y (dexter's lab accent emphasized) silly. No wonder they look at you funny.