<p>
[quote]
wutang: I just took the cost of living into account. That's one of the reasons I'll probably go to Toronto for law school
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, the reason you're going to Toronto is because you can't get into Harvard. Or any decent law school for that matter.</p>
<p>^excuse me?</p>
<p>The median GPA for Osgoode law school in Toronto is a 3.9. Only Yale Law School has a higher median entering GPA in North America.</p>
<p>LOL, quit making stuff up wutang.</p>
<p>Osgoode isn't even the best law school in Canada -- Maclean's</a> first-ever ranking of Canada's law schools | Macleans.ca - Education - Universities</p>
<p>You're crazy if you're implying that Osgoode is better than Harvard, Stanford, or Columbia.</p>
<p>since when do pharmacists make 200k ever, much less RIGHT OUT OF PHARM SCHOOL? I used to be pre-med, explored all of this stuff, and I know for sure that pharmacy hardly pays 100k right after pharm school:</p>
<p>Average</a> Pharmacist Salary. Pharmacist Job, Career Education & Unemployment Help</p>
<p>If pharmacists were guaranteed 200k, I'm willing to bet all the dellusional pre-meds who think being a doc will make them rich would suddenly develop a "passion" for pharmaceuticals, and med school would be much less competitive to get into.</p>
<p>No, I'm going to Toronto because I don't want to get dragged down with Wall Street when it runs itself into the ground again, which I can guarantee it will. No, I'm not gonna make $800k a year in Toronto but at least I'll have a job when Canada's risk-averse economic policy results in banks NOT blowing up and spewing toxic assets everywhere.</p>
<p>And you don't even know which schools I'm looking to go to. Toronto's got a lot of schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
since when do pharmacists make 200k ever, much less RIGHT OUT OF PHARM SCHOOL? I used to be pre-med, explored all of this stuff, and I know for sure that pharmacy hardly pays 100k right after pharm school:</p>
<p>Average Pharmacist Salary. Pharmacist Job, Career Education & Unemployment Help</p>
<p>If pharmacists were guaranteed 200k, I'm willing to bet all the dellusional pre-meds who think being a doc will make them rich would suddenly develop a "passion" for pharmaceuticals, and med school would be much less competitive to get into.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The typical offer from CVS around my area is usually $100+k/year for 36hours/week(3days/week) which means you can work somewhere else when you're not working for CVS. So if you choose to work 72 hours/week (which = 2 jobs), you'll double your gross income. Many of my friends are doing that. Cash is king and if you have a high income in this economy, you can really take advantage of many things and buy assets/securities at their 156+ week lows.</p>
<p>Polo08816,</p>
<p>Its true that most Pharmacy Students make about 100k out of college but working two jobs in which the average shift is 12 hours long is just crazy(at least for me).</p>
<p>then that's really not a fair comparison. I'm sure there are plenty of other jobs out there that pay a higher hourly wage than pharmacists, so the only way to really be fair is to have both of them work the same number of hours and then compare compensation. </p>
<p>Btw, people looking at pharmacy generally are willing to sacrifce some salary (while still living very well) for flexibility in terms of lifestyle. Obviously if you work 72 hours a week, you'll get paid for it, but to say all pharmacists work 72 hours a week and thus most of them make 200k is just ridiculous, because the ones that do are few and far between, otherwise the average figures for pharmacists would be much higher.</p>
<p>You are absolutely correct. That's why we've been taking Polo's figures with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>Again, is there anyone on earth that actually chooses between becoming an ibanker and a pharmacist? Really, it just seems so very unlikely.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm sure there are plenty of other jobs out there that pay a higher hourly wage than pharmacists, so the only way to really be fair is to have both of them work the same number of hours and then compare compensation.
[/quote]
I'm sure there are as well. There are just not that many jobs out of school that pay higher hourly wage than pharmacy. In other words, a lot of things have to come together and you have to be lucky.
[quote]
because the ones that do are few and far between, otherwise the average figures for pharmacists would be much higher.
[/quote]
While you can quote average figures, the fact remains that in pharmacy if you want to beat the average figures, it is entirely in your control. You don't even have to be the better pharmacist, you just have to be the pharmacist that works more hours.
[quote]
That's why we've been taking Polo's figures with a grain of salt.
[/quote]
This is based on people that I know and have graduated from pharmacy and are currently working. I really don't care if you believe it or not.
[quote]
Again, is there anyone on earth that actually chooses between becoming an ibanker and a pharmacist? Really, it just seems so very unlikely.
[/quote]
I did and, financially, it was a MUCH superior decision hands down. It was really between going to NYU Stern, paying $200,000 total, and enter the now destroyed Wall Street (working like a hog and not getting paid more than a pharmacist) OR pay nothing for school, spending only 2 extra years in school, and being guaranteed a job ($100+k/year for 36 hours a week) with higher barriers of entry (= more security and stability).</p>
<p>Polo, the people who go into ibanking and pharmacy are different types. One settles for security and limited upside potential while the other strives for personal achievement, takes risk and if successful, reaps very high rewards financially.</p>
<p>A starting salary of $100K may seem high to you and I agree it is a good salary, but you have to remember, 10 years, 20 years and 30 years down the road, you will still be making the same salary with just incremental cost of living adjustments. Most pharmacists salaries are lockstep, that is, when you start, you are making the same salary as someone with 10, 20 years of experience unless they are a supervisor and that's only a 10% differential. However, it is very far fetched to say you can work 2 jobs and make $200K+ because it is logistically very improbable.</p>
<p>My SIL is a pharmacist.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Polo, the people who go into ibanking and pharmacy are different types. One settles for security and limited upside potential while the other strives for personal achievement, takes risk and if successful, reaps very high rewards financially.
[/quote]
The AVERAGE person who goes into ibanking or pharmacy are different types. But we'll get more into this later...
[quote]
A starting salary of $100K may seem high to you and I agree it is a good salary, but you have to remember, 10 years, 20 years and 30 years down the road, you will still be making the same salary with just incremental cost of living adjustments. Most pharmacists salaries are lockstep, that is, when you start, you are making the same salary as someone with 10, 20 years of experience unless they are a supervisor and that's only a 10% differential.
[/quote]
I agree. The average pharmacist will essentially be making the same income 10 years down the road.<br>
[quote]
However, it is very far fetched to say you can work 2 jobs and make $200K+ because it is logistically very improbable
[/quote]
However, the AVERAGE ibanker will burn out 5 years or less. If working 72 hours a week as a pharmacist is logistically improbable, so is working 72+ hours a week as an ibanker.</p>
<p>The point is that you can't compare the ibanker that makes it past the first couple of years to the pharmacist that just graduated school. You should compare each at the point where they have just finished schooling so you can get an accurate picture of the failure rate in each field (note the % of ibankers that don't make it past their 2nd year and switch career fields completely).</p>
<p>One thing people neglect to mention is that once you enter ibanking that is your only life. You no longer have the flexibility and time to differentiate in order isolate yourself from the volatility and risk of the financial sector. Your job security in the long term is largely out of your control. Don't forget that you will be working 70+ hours per week at minimum.
Compare that to the ambitious pharmacist who pursues another graduate degree such as a PhD or a MS ChemE while only working 36 hours a week for $100+k/year. Someone with a PharmD + MS ChemE at this point will fare infinitely better than your average ibanker in recessions because you can work in virtually ANY field from pharmaceuticals to manufacturing and even the energy industry. Heck, you could even go for a JD (to go into IP/patent law or regulatory affairs) or an MBA (for management. Heck, you've already have a pretty solid technical expertise base to one day establish a start up) while working full time as a pharmacist. You really have no opportunity cost in terms of money, only your time.
People forget and probably most often don't take advantage of the flexibility as a pharmacist, but for those that do, the sky is the limit.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One thing people neglect to mention is that once you enter ibanking that is your only life
[/quote]
This is bunk. Ibankers have many more exit options including MsChemE, MBA and JD or whatever you mentioned. Remember, every single industry will have a business or finance department. Banking and finance are related.
Whoever said ibankers will burn out in 5 years? They leave because they have so many exit options while many stay on. Hmom5 has been in banking over 30 years.</p>
<p>If pharmacy is such a great career, why do you need more degrees to get into another field? I hope you know that a JD and MBA degree done PT is not the same value as those done full time.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is bunk. Ibankers have many more exit options including MsChemE, MBA and JD or whatever you mentioned.
[/quote]
Not true. If the terminal degree is a MBA from any top 10 b-school, the person with the most diversified background has more exit opportunities. Anyone can do finance, but you can't get back into an innovation-driven field if you haven't started out in it.
[quote]
Remember, every single industry will have a business or finance department. Banking and finance are related.
[/quote]
Yes, every single industry will have a business or finance department but if that isn't the core of the business, you can only go so far in the corporation.
[quote]
If pharmacy is such a great career, why do you need **more degrees **so you can work in another field? Dream on.
[/quote]
This is exactly the problem with ibanking/finance; lack of barriers to entry. ANYONE with a bachelor's can work in this field so that essentially means if you work in this field, you're very replaceable.
You're still missing the point. Pharmacy in certain situations is the best field to get into based on a first degree from HS. You'd probably need a more diversified techical base than just a standard PharmD if you want to stand out from the crowd and one day get involved in a start-up.
The point is 10 to 20 years out the results of both fields are very hard to predict. It's very possible that someone could burn out from the long hours in finance as it is also very possible that someone from pharmacy is not that ambitious and is content working at a retail pharmacy for 100k/year.
You could get someone who becomes a very successful ibanker or trader making multi millions or more per year. The chances of that are probably as great as someone making a breakthrough medical discovery and turning that into a multibillion dollar industry.</p>
<p>CBreeze, exactly.</p>
<p>Polo, the death of ibanking has been greatly exaggerated. As a pharmacist, you will not make a fraction of the money you would have in a successful ibanking career. </p>
<p>I really have a hard time getting my hands around someone deciding between these 2 careers. In 30 years in banking, I've never met a sole who considered such disparate careers. No one with passion for finance could be happy as a pharmacist. So I assume when you say you chose between the two it was in an abstract way. Did you even do a banking internship? Did you attend a target banking school?</p>
<p>Clearly math and odds are not your strong suit as your claim that a pharmacist has as much of a chance making a breakthrough medical discovery as an ibanker has of making millions is ridiculous.</p>
<p>And why do you hang around the ibanking board defending pharmacy, do you need to convince yourself you've made the right monetary and intellectual decision?</p>
<p>Finally some insight from a Polo post in 2007:</p>
<p>Quote:
If I had a cumulative undergrad GPA > 3.0 and an in-major GPA of 3.5, would it be hard to get into a Master's program at a state college like Rutgers University?
I know my GPA could be better, but I'm not going for a PhD program. </p>
<p>So you chose between ib and pharmacy? Nothing wrong with an active imagination but kids read these boards so let's try some honest disclosure.</p>
<p>You have about a 0.0001 chance of having a successful IB career. Truth is many people burn out. Even more get fired when the economy turns south. I don't think pharmacists are subject to that same kind of volatility.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As a pharmacist, you will not make a fraction of the money you would have in a successful ibanking career.
[/quote]
You keep missing the point. I'm not saying that you will make more as a practicing pharmacist than you would as an Ibanker. I'm saying that starting off as a pharmacist gives you so much time that you can use it to acquire other expertises while making more than a ibanking analyst. The ibanking analyst is stuck on a one way career path in the world of finance (which apparently hasn't done so well lately).
[quote]
No one with passion for finance could be happy as a pharmacist.
[/quote]
The thing is many in ibanking don't even have a passion for finance. They were doing it for money blindly and most didn't last.
[quote]
Clearly math and odds are not your strong suit as your claim that a pharmacist has as much of a chance making a breakthrough medical discovery as an ibanker has of making millions is ridiculous.
[/quote]
I said the odds are quite unpredictable at that level. You're talking about an ibanker that is more than average to someone who has a PharmD as a start.</p>
<p>One thing that I want to emphasize is I'm talking about someone who has a PharmD as a first degree from HS while you keep focusing in on the practice of pharmacy. Not all people who have PharmDs stay practicing pharmacists, just like not all ibankers will ever succeed.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And why do you hang around the ibanking board defending pharmacy, do you need to convince yourself you've made the right monetary and intellectual decision?
[/quote]
Am I souring the field of ibanking?
...as if they haven't already done that for themselves in the past couple of months?</p>
<p>Polo, you are a 21 year old pharmacy student at Rutgers with a self described low GPA who admits a top MBA program is unlikely. You had as much chance of ever becoming an ibanker as my 97 year old grandmother, and she's a pistol.</p>
<p>In another post you explain you have no interest in pharmacy, you are just doing this for security, which to you is a 6 figure salary. That's fine and many do this, but it means you certainly don't have the soul of a banker. There is no one, I mean no one, on WS in a FO job that would ever set out in life to get a trade degree to make $100K. So your thinking is another reason you probably had no chance at an ibanking job even if you were at Harvard, risk taking is just not in your gut.</p>
<p>You often say in posts that anyone can become a banker. So not true, Polo, so not true. Just having a pharmacy degree on your resume will probably keep you out of jobs that are seeking movers and shakers.</p>
<p>I've heard this all before--I'm just getting the nursing/pharm/engineering degree as a fall back. Most people in these situations fall back.</p>
<p>The issue is you speak as though you know something about the banking industry and what it's like on WS when in post after post you show us that you're a pharm student in NJ. So stop the charade. While in your dreams you may have chosen between Wall Street and Walmart, you know nothing about the Street and will soon be an expert on Walmart, doing a boring job you're not even interested in. All for $100K. Instructing Mrs. Jones not to drink with that and slapping 'will make drowsy' stickers on small bottles. Trust me, even in this economy, there is not a banker on earth who wishes he chose pharm.</p>