Don’t forget: 8-ish years of not drawing a full-time salary means an extra…$400k?..in the hole, realative to working out of HS.
In ECON, we crunched the numbers, at it was about a wash, going to college/post grad vs sticking it in the market. (Where it pays off is in quality of life on the job: less strenuous, more fulfilling.)
Try med school.
And a doctor with an average salary here in New England of $150k…isn’t going to be spending years and years paying back loans.
My nephew just finished his PhD and it was 7 years after four years of college.
What degree required him to go 7 years FULL-TIME? He was probably going only part time…and that means that $300,00 you quoted is a lot less. My daughter got her masters from Harvard in just under 2 years. She may go for her PHD…but not right now. That’ll be another 2 years. Undergraduate degree from MIT.
And very few people these days have to pay full tuition. Some colleges like MIT or Harvard have 75% of students on some type of financial aid.
Our son has a bachelor’s (biology) and two Master’s degrees (Environmental Design and an MBA)). The bachelor degree he paid for by a scholarship and living at home, working in the summer and bartending on the weekend, and taking the bus to school. For the first Master’s degree he took the courses part time while working and finished in 2.5 years.
For his second Master’s he got the company to pay his tuition, and did evening attendance, and some time off to write exams.
He never cost us a single penny and incurred no debt in the form of student loans. I did give him my 1984 Impala in 1996.
He spent the EQUIVALENT of 8 years in university without incurring any debt.
Our daughter was eleigble for subsidiezed and unsubsidized loans only. We cover the difference so as not to take any unsubsidized loans. 9% intrest accures from the day of the loan on unsubsidized. She is below average on student loan debt, but it is going to be $238 per month for payoff at this point. One more smester oto go!
Could you please bring this back on topic? Thank you.
Holy cow. We looked at a car today and they sure are proud of them. We usually bought during recessions but looks like car sales are up now so back to the drawing board and sharpen the pencil.
Sorry for getting off track.
At current prices and all the features of cars I keep looking to see if that includes running water and onboard maid service.
The govt does some boneheaded things(like making cars not affordable) and the luxury tax,I still say the Doctors do a lot better then average in this economically depressed area,most poor folks cant hardly afford their services(service isnt that great either)Auto mechanics around here,are a much better deal.People still buy new cars somehow,The people around here that manage to have a good paying job,seem to like to invest heavily in frills and hobbies.There are two corps that if something would happen to around here would make things a true ghost town(a lot of rich folks would like that)
Don’t blame the government for a lot of the safety changes. The insurance industry works hard to improve safety and has a significant influence on auto safety laws. IHS/HLDI is a prime reason you have many safety features. The half offset and quarter offset frontal crash tests are all theirs. The insurers can pay out less for claims and make more money. Now that you know it’s really private industry, are you any happier?
Something as regulated as autos private?Pvt industry and govt go hand in hand(not just the Feds either,state govts are just as culpable)you pay the right politicians off and the skies the limits.What will be next? the bouyancy test,the rearward 180 degree,tangential spinning impact test?.Someone on another forum was lamenting there is still haze in LA,so by his reasoning,cars are not yet clean enough(no mention was made of the burgeoning population)What about more driver ed and tougher testing standards,appropiate speed limits? as Von Richtofen said"Its not the machine,its the man in the machine"driving is serious business and cars can only be made so safe and foolproof and be affordable.Back in the 80s,there was a car called the RSV,I believe .Extremely ,ridiculously safe,but it wasnt produced,why?
I know the govt has done a lot of good things(that private industry,probaly never would have implemented)but sometimes it gets silly and tautomer.
The insurance companies work a lot harder to change car designs than the Feds do. NHTSA started the tests with full frontal impact, and continue to do some tests. But since the buying public pays a lot of attention to the IIHS/HLDII tests, the Feds don’t have to.
I just hate it when things get tautomer…
Needlessly,too(whoops,did I say that)and again.
@jtsanders is correct…Almost every safety regulation in vehicles today…or building codes were lobbied for by the insurance industry (seat belts, air-bags, automatic wipers when raining, 5mph bumpers…etc etc)
The story about the RSV… the safest car ever built, until that time. The technology is now common.
Is is any wonder no car maker ever produced it? #1 It is Ugly! # 2 It was designed by research scientists and engineers, not product and manufacturing engineers with an eye towards volume manufacturing. and #3 We learned NOT to rely totally on airbags without seatbelts. Those high powered bags can kill their occupants as well as save them.
It does look like it pushed the technology forward. ABS was used in Europe and crash detection in Japan - both places with fewer lawyers than the US. I can say that was a HUGE concern for car companies in the US. They did NOT want to be the first adopters of that technology!
Needlessly,too(whoops,did I say that)and again.
Oh, you meant tautologous or tautological…
Oh boy. Your tax dollars at work.
Hmm,possibly.
@jtsanders is correct...Almost every safety regulation in vehicles today...or building codes were lobbied for by the insurance industry (seat belts, air-bags, automatic wipers when raining, 5mph bumpers....etc etc)
Just how many lives were saved by 5mph bumpers?
On the other hand, just to be the devil’s advocate, who would know better the injuries and damages from car accidents and how to prevent them than the insurance industry? I would think their information would be a lot more reliable than the folks sitting in DC. The issue is the politicians and feds need to gather the lobbyist information and make their own decisions.