bostonbubble.com

[Boston ITer]

[mpr]

[balor123]

Certainly wages don't have to rise just because there is a shortage. The business conditions have to support it for starters. Google and Goldman Sachs make about the same per employee. The supply vs demand curve needs to support high pay as mentioned as well but we know that there's a shortage. Even with high demand, paying more needs to motivate employees. Google might pay more if it thought that would keep people from leaving and I suspect that this is part of the problem. Bankers are among the most greedy works on the planet and will jump ship in a heartbeat over money but eningeers typically will not so companies don't use it as a way to retain employees.

[balor123]

As an engineer, though, I find it unfair that when tech companies have trouble hiring talent America generously allows them to import talent rather than having to pay to poach from foreign employers. But when there's a shortage of doctors, we're all forced to pay the rising costs even though there are many qualified doctors who would love to immigrate and bring the cost down. If engineers pursued such a policy, then the opportunities would naturally migrate overseas as companies in Asia would naturally displace American companies. Doctors, lawyers, bankers, etc don't have this problem. They can erect barriers and force others to pay them. The only way their professions can become less lucrative is if America as a whole becomes poorer and they are unable constrain supply enough to make up for it. This "rent" have been rising for years.

[Boston ITer]

[Boston ITer]

Sorry, this quote was by mpr, not Balor.

[mpr]

BostonITer

Everything you write is just anecdotal, so its very hard to argue with
or take seriously.

Why dont you find some data - which should be easily available -
comparing the starting and median salaries of doctors, various types of
engineers and bankers.

You talk about how much a neurosurgeon earns. But thats a very highly
skilled specialty - actually subspecialty - which probably takes 10-15
years just to get the qualification. You cant compare that to someone
writing code out of college. Probably you should compare it to
some very senior high level software engineer at a top company.

[balor123]

Primary care makes about $150k - $200k. Specialists make from $200k - $500k. Salaries do not vary much by skill level I think, as there's a massive shortage of doctors and the payers don't discriminate based on it. I wouldn't be surprised if their salaries dropped a lot if the floodgates were opened but I suspect neurosurgeons would probably still make a lot more than engineers. I imagine an engineer with a Phd might make about the same as a specialist. Part of the reason why American doctors make so much is that producing them is so woefully inefficient (itself a roadblock they've erected). America is the only country which requires doctors to go through a lihberal arts education before going to medical school. Due to the competitiveness, they are forced to go to the best and most expensive schools just to even have a shot of getting accepted. That's $150k in debt to begin with and they've learned nothing relevant to their careers. MCAT requires 1.5 years of preparation and a few thousand for the training course. Subsequent exams cost about the same. Medical schools themselves are usually very expensive in part because they have to hire expensive doctors to teach at them. Afterwards they are required to go through lengthy residencies. While they learn on the job, I suspect the long hours are partly a form of hazing and for the hospital to extract as much value out of them as possible, though they are subsidized by Medicare. We could save a lot by eliminating the liberal arts education, building more medical schools so all qualified applicants can enter the field, and reducing the workload during residency to just that which is useful for learning. I suspect if you did that you'd end up with European cost doctors. In the UK a primary care makes about $80k adjusted for local wages. Of course, doctors hate the brutalness of the field but I think given a choice most prefer the American system over the European one because, like all of us, they're willing to work harder for the extra pay, even if it's inefficient.

As for engineers, they start at about $60k with BS, $75k with MS, and $90k w/Phd. Regardless of degree, they'll saturate at about $140k in the Boston area. Some make more but usually as managers. Skill level is a combination of talent, resume, and luck - there's only so much you can do to make yourself a top employee. As you get older and make more job stability goes down significantly - that pay may not be reproducible at another employer. Engineers older than 40 often have a hard time finding employment, a big problem right now. These numbers are for the Boston area.

[Boston ITer]

As Balor has stated above, salaries for MDs are in the ranges above and mainly vary between starting physicians, their area of work, and one's with a certain amount of experience.

http://www.allied-physicians.com/salary-surveys/physicians/

As you can see, general internal medicine pays the least and even that starts at ~$150K. The worst graduate from medical school can find a general internist job at a rural clinic somewhere.

Experienced specialists, for most areas, all earn above $200K w/o issues.

Engineering salaries, however, vary considerably, however, the top end isn't as well delineated in typical salary.com & payscale.com type of sites however, glassdoor.com does have engineering salary surveys from various elite tech companies.

DuPont:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Dupont-Chemical-Engineer-Salaries-E215_D_KO7,24.htm


Merck:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/merck-salary-SRCH_KE0,5.htm


QualComm:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/QUALCOMM-Senior-Software-Engineer-Salaries-E640_D_KO9,33.htm

Motorola:

http://www.glassdoor.com/Salary/Motorola-Salaries-E451.htm


As you can see from the above, the top experienced engineers tend to be slightly above $100K but remain in a tight band not exceeding $140K, even at places like QualComm and Motorola. At mainstay places like DuPont or Merck, many peak out at ~$100K. These places are considered highly competitive (& prestigious) tech companies to be recruited into.

[Boston ITer]

[mpr]

I think its perfectly reasonable to compare an engineering PhD
with someone in general medicine. The number of years of
training is comparable, or even slightly more for a doctor.

When you talk about management positions (and since
you seem to insist engineer means software engineer)
I imagine that this could still be a senior engineering position.
For example, to take someone recently in the news, Eric Schmidt
used to be the head of Java development for Sun. Presumably
this was not because he new nothing about software engineering.

I'm not sure there's a shortage of doctors in the US (sources ?),
except possibly in some rural areas. As you point out, there are huge embedded costs in medical training in the US, and I'm not sure whether those salaries include the cost of liability insurance when the doctor is in private practice.

In any case, to return to the source of the discussion, I'd be quite happy
if some of those traders became doctors. But there are also plenty
of other gainful specialties. You seem to be focused on one particular
kind of engineering which may be impacted by the H1B program
maybe by about 20% (according to one of BostonITer's links),
and which also happens to be the most offshorable. I dont believe this is the primary reason college kids don't go into engineering.

[Boston ITer]

One of the reasons why I added in DuPont and Merck is that those places tend to hire more chemical engineers than IT types but yet, they also have trouble in keeping headcount.

http://www.industryweek.com/articles/dupont_slashes_2000_more_jobs_19097.aspx

http://prescriptions.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/08/merck-sheds-15-of-workforce/?src=twt&twt=nytimesbusiness

[mpr]

[Boston ITer]

[mpr]