June 26, 2007
Top 25 Highest Paying Jobs
Saving my readers from the pagination hell of Forbes’s website, here’s the list in friendly form. Forbes has one of the worst websites out there: cluttered, crammed with tiny-print links and ad-packed, it’s just plain awful.
America’s 25 Best-Paying Jobs (Title | Mean Annual Wage):
- Anesthesiologists | $184,340
- Surgeons | $184,150
- Obstetricians And Gynecologists | $178,040
- Orthodontists | $176,900
- Oral And Maxillofacial Surgeons | $164,760
- Internists, General | $160,860
- Prosthodontists | $158,940
- Psychiatrists | $149,990
- Family And General Practitioners | $149,850
- Chief Executives | $144,600
- Physicians And Surgeons, All Other | $142,220
- Pediatricians, General | $141,440
- Dentists, General | $140,950
- Airline Pilots, Copilots And Flight Engineers | $140,380
- Podiatrists | $118,500
- Lawyers | $113,660
- Air Traffic Controllers | $110,270
- Engineering Managers | $110,030
- Dentists, All Other Specialists | $108,340
- Natural Sciences Managers | $107,970
- Marketing Managers | $107,610
- Computer And Information Systems Managers | $107,250
- Sales Managers | $102,730
- Petroleum Engineers | $101,620
- Financial Managers | $101,450
Cat: | Time: 11:44 am (utc+8)
June 26th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
wonderful incentives in health-care.
June 26th, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Surprised that specialist dentists get paid less than general dentists, and am surprised at the high remuneration of podiatrists also.
June 26th, 2007 at 2:58 pm
Would be interesting to have the median and the ranges, too.
June 26th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
@chad: Yes, makes me want to run right out and see Sicko.
@EC: I’m not sure about their definitions either, but I do know my dentist (general) and his wife (non-working) have matching monster Mercedes. ;-)
@Markus: Speaking from a nerdy statistical perspective, I wish the same!
June 26th, 2007 at 5:58 pm
So where’s all the people who work at investment banks?
They always seem to be missing in these kind of surveys..
June 26th, 2007 at 9:53 pm
PA: There probably isn’t the right job classification/code to capture narrow groups like that?
June 26th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Perhaps their income can not be as easily measured. Looks like a lot of these jobs get W2’s, while investment bankers also do, I bet most of their income doesn’t show up on a W2.
June 27th, 2007 at 2:13 am
Lawyers look way too cheap, entry level is $120k and most partners avg $400k or they get the boot.
Financial managers? hedge funds? friend of mine covers hedgies for a brokerage firm has several clients making 100 mil per year, so these numbers are way way off for mutual funds, etc,
June 27th, 2007 at 2:49 am
The link to Forbes doesn’t seem to work anymore?
Makes sense that anaesthetists make more than surgeons. It’s like that joke in which the patient complains about the bill and the anaesthetist says: the putting you to sleep part was free but the waking up part, well..
June 27th, 2007 at 7:02 am
@Dan: Good point about the W2s.
@Eyal: Link fixed, thanks.
June 27th, 2007 at 8:05 am
Bonuses, options, and other incomes of CEOs, lawyers, ibankers and hedgies do show up on W2s. High income earners are the prime targets of IRS audits. It’s not a very smart thing to do to risk IRS scrutiny and pay penalties by leaving out a big portion of their incomes.
In my opinion the survey is flawed by design. The numbers come from a survey directed at employers that “asks about basic pay, incentive bonuses and commissions, but not overtime pay or non-wage compensation, such as stock options.”
My guess is that the top law firms, ibanks, and hedge funds don’t even bother to respond.
June 27th, 2007 at 9:32 am
Brian: Option-related income shows up on a W2? Are you sure?
June 27th, 2007 at 10:05 am
CM: They eventually do, when they are exercised and the gains pocketed.
June 27th, 2007 at 11:11 am
It’s a pity that I did not see this list when I choosed my unversity majot many years ago . I do not know 90% of them . I guess most of them related doctor . My father is a head of local hospital . My dream was often disturbed by phone ring around 2 PM when I was a kid. My father would rush to the operation room . I made decision then not to be a doctor as my career.It’s very interesting that people make big decision based on the experience in child .
June 27th, 2007 at 12:40 pm
So I wonder where day-trader fits into that list…
June 27th, 2007 at 1:11 pm
EC: I’d guess the mean annual wage for day traders is somewhere around the $12,000 mark because there are a lot of sub-zeros out there. ;-)
June 27th, 2007 at 1:19 pm
:-)
and what would be your guess for the mean for small traders above the zero line?
June 27th, 2007 at 4:04 pm
Eyal: Still a depressingly low figure. :-( The smart burnouts start hawking their bluebar - redbar trading “system” on an unsuspecting public, all for the low, low price of only $1,995 (shipping not included).
June 27th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
Glad I never went to law school as I had planned…
June 28th, 2007 at 12:48 am
An entry level Civil Engineer makes about $50k, with a license about $70k. Once your an Engineering Manager, after 20 years, then you can make that $110k.
June 28th, 2007 at 4:58 am
Brian, not that I am there yet, but surely equity partners, ceo’s, ibankers, etc get compensation that is not eligible for federal income tax.
I guess what I really meant was base pay, like you see a lot of CEO’s base salary is $1, etc.
June 28th, 2007 at 7:36 am
Dan,
As long as the employment income is sourced from a legitimate, reputable firm that reports taxes to the IRS, all forms of compensation make their way into the W2s.
CEOs who receive a base salary of $1 typically have allowances and stock options that show up on the W2s. Allowances make their way into the W2s every year, but stock options only show up on the W2s when they are exercised.
Benefits that cannot be cashed (ie. use of company car, house, plane, laundry service etc.) are the only exceptions that I’m aware of.
If the company picks up the bill for everything for the employee as a business expense, obviously the amounts would not show on the W2s. But this typically only happens in small, tightly held businesses, and generally frowned upon by equity partners/shareholders. It also sends a red flag to the IRS for an audit.
It’s been a few years since I last audited, but I don’t think new rules, if any, would change the basic premise.
June 28th, 2007 at 8:11 am
agree w/ Eyal about the reason for anesthesiology being highly compensated, though the med students I used to know sneered at the specialty as requiring nothing but the ability to twist a few knobs . . . .
July 31st, 2007 at 10:36 am
Ditto to that–I considered anesthesiology, but realized all they do is play on their lap tops and pay bills–and turn knobs…which is why nurse-anesthesists (CRNA) are so widely used. Anesthesia is down to such a science, nurses can be trained. For most of you, a nurse will be delivering your anesthesia, FYI. I should have went into dentistry or podiatry. Internal med pays nothing!!! Also note, as a physician, you can becoming partner in a surgery center, hospital etc. So that gives way for more potential income.
July 31st, 2007 at 10:40 am
Also, keep in mind this is including physicians working part-time, hospital employees (which always pays less), government employees (less also), military docs. So, many docs make more, many make less.
July 31st, 2007 at 10:46 am
Mark: That’s why we’d like to see the high-low range, the median, standard deviation, etc. These “mean” wage numbers don’t “mean” a lot.
July 31st, 2007 at 11:45 am
Mark - in Canada, as an internal medicine doc you would make way more than a podiatrist. I am still in disbelief about the quoted amount for podiatrists as it seems so different from what is made in Canada. Also as an internist, according to the survey you are still far above podiatry and the general dentists also. I would think internal medicine is a great choice for a states based doctor. In Canada, with the extra year of residency, it may not be the most “cost-effective” choice of specialties.
August 19th, 2007 at 7:26 am
E, thanks for the input. this is turning into a blog.. haha. the only reason why I said that is because my cousins and uncles are podiatric surgeons and $117 is definitely on the low end.
August 19th, 2007 at 8:37 am
Mark: You mean they’re surgeons who specialize in feet? That’s different from being a podiatrist, isn’t it?
August 19th, 2007 at 8:51 am
Medical doctor surgeons who specialize in the joints etc are orthopedic surgeons. That’s already quite specialized, I don’t think there are that many orthopedic surgeons who limit their practices to feet, as that can be the realm of podiatrists.
August 19th, 2007 at 2:00 pm
EC: That’s why I’m confused by Mark’s term, “podiatric surgeon.” Does he mean pediatric surgeon?
August 20th, 2007 at 5:58 am
Hey, does Mark mean podiatric surgeons or orthopedic surgeons? Because they are parallel but not the same.
August 20th, 2007 at 7:25 am
E.nd: I think what we’ll eventually discover is that we’re talking about podipedic surgeons. ;-)
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:45 am
DRC: Thanks for your thorough explanation; it all makes sense now. ;-)
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:33 am
DRC - I got your explanation by email by it is not posted on this site for some reason. I found the explanation of old school v new school podiatrists intriguing - but do you mean to say that new podiatry graduates can either specialize in the medicine side (board-certified in podiatric medicine and podiatric orthopedics) and only operate on the more distal foot and toes or choose to be in the more residency trained surgical side (board-certified in podiatric surgery, which allows surgery of up to the ankle)?
August 23rd, 2007 at 9:41 am
E: Somehow the spam killer killed off DRC’s excellent comment. Can you email me your email of it and I’ll repost it? Thanks.
August 23rd, 2007 at 10:13 am
Comment from DRC, inexplicably deleted:
Hi. I just wanted to comment and clarify some things:
As a newly practicing podiatrist, I can attest our salary ranges are very confusing, even to our own specialty. The APMA, does a annual salary survey and the numbers are usually never on par.
There have been several suggested reasons for this. The primary one is that today there are two kinds of podiatrists (also called, foot doctors, podiatric physicians, podiatric surgeons). “Old School” and “New Schools” doctors. Podiatry is a relatively new specialty (Little over 100 years old) and the pioneers only had 4 years of medical school (after college) and 0-1 year residency. That suited them just fine as their scope of practice was rather limited. Today, some many decades later, podiatric physicians are highly trained. Most of todays graduates complete college, 4 years of medical school and a 3 year surgical residency, which allows them to become foot and ankle surgeons, not only foot. So, this means your average “old school” doc will only do forefoot (the first half of the foot and toes) procedures, while a recent doc will do the entire fore and rear foot, ankle, and surrounding tissue/structures. So, the trend is that newer podiatric surgeons are joining orthopaedi
c groups and will be treating all F&A patients, which allow the orthopaedists to focus on other parts (shoulder, knee, hip, spine, hands, etc.). Residencies (fellowships) for orthopaedists in F&A are rare, and the ones that do exist usually go unfilled. So, thus being a need for a F&A specialist, the podiatric surgeon. And THUS, having such a wide range in salary. I can attest that $118,500 is far under a newly trained surgeon, and is more on par with old school docs. I can guarantee this salary number will rise though the years as the older podiatrists retire.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Old school podiatrists had three residency-types to choose from:
1) 12-month residency (non-surgical)
2) 24-month residency (fore-foot surgical)
3) 36-month residency (fore-and-hind-foot surgical)
However, in the old days, the 36-month residency had very little seats, and few podiatrists obtained them. This made the salary-range of old school podiatrists so broad: the non-surgical pods made far less than the surgical ones. Because many of the older podiatrists were left with non-surgical residencies, they are disgruntled and talk negative of the profession.
Currently, podiatric schools have eliminated the 12-month residency, and ALL podiatrists are surgeons now. Furthermore, by 2015, the 24-month residency will most likely be eliminated, and all new podiatrists will require the 36-month residency. Not only would this make the training uniform across the profession, it would also make the salary-ranges less spread-out.
The average salary for podiatrists in the year 2007 is $130,000. However, this is including ALL practicing podiatrists: both new and old (non-surgical) ones. The salary-range for surgical podiatrists in the year 2007 is $150,000 to $250,000. The graying of the Baby-Boom generation and the rise of exercise will only increase the demand for podiatrists.
September 27th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
Keep in mind that surgical podiatrists make more than most primary-care physicians (family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, etc.). Also, they work only 40 hours/week. Compare this to the 65-80 hours/week worked by physicians. Podiatry is very similar to dentistry, which is another hot field.
September 27th, 2007 at 4:15 pm
D.S.: Thanks for your insightful comments.
September 27th, 2007 at 9:16 pm
Thanks Maoxian. I wanted to add another bit:
A good portion of the public still perceives podiatrists as “nail clippers,” and dentists as “tooth mechanics.” I remember when I was applying to dental school, I had a PhD professor ask me if dentistry was a Master’s certificate. This shows that the public as a whole, both educated and uneducated, is unaware of the health professions in our society.
Getting back to salary ranges, Forbes’ list, while fun to look at, must be taken with a grain of salt. Many of the field include salaried professionals, who make much lower than the average, and as a result, drive the overall average down. According to the American Dental Association (ADA), the average salary for a general dentist in 2007 was $200,000, and specialists usually make over $300,000. I have the slightest clue why Forbes listed general dentists as a higher-paying field than specialty dentists. Well, I’m done ranting… thanks for letting me post my thoughts. Take care.
December 20th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
I’m studying to become an Anesthesiologist in the future
and its not the money why I choose to do this, is because I love to help people.
December 20th, 2007 at 10:32 pm
R.Craig: I believe you because that’s exactly why I blog — it isn’t just about the obscene income, it’s about helping out the little guy. :-)
January 9th, 2008 at 1:40 am
A response to Mark that made the comment that “anesthesia is down to such a science that nurses can be trained” First of all, nurses have been administering anesthesia since the Civil War. Our profession is over one-hundred years old. We are the oldest nursing speciality. Sister Bernard, a nurse anesthetist, actually taught MD’s to administer anesthesia at the nurse anesthetist school that she opened in the early 1900’s. In addition, the military has used nurse anesthetist almost exclusively in times of war and peace.
We must recieve our BSN in Nursing (4 years), then work for a minimum of one to two years working in the Intensive Care Unit. Then we may apply to a masters anesthesia program. There are not nearly as many nurse anesthesia schools as there are medical schools so it is actually harder to get accepted. My program only accepted 25 applicants, all of us had 3.8 GPAs or higher and excelled on our GRE. Our curriculum is very demanding. I was in anesthsia school for thirty six months during which I lived and breathed anesthesia. You cannot work during this time so school is your life! After graduating with our masters in Nurse Anesthesi we must pass a very intense certification exam.
Part of what has made anesthesia so safe today is the efforts and dedication of nurse anesthetists and our governing body the AANA. We have worked hard to come up with ways to make anesthesia safer along with our MD collegues. Please see the AANA site for more info. Oh, in addition, our starting salary is about 110,000!
January 9th, 2008 at 7:50 am
T Fletch: Thanks for the education and I liked your unintentional? wordplay, “I lived and breathed anesthesia.” $110,000 sounds low since you’re apparently doing exactly what and MD anesthesiologist does.
January 9th, 2008 at 9:09 am
Something similar was in the news in BC Canada today. There is an equity pay law that may put taxpayers on the line for backpay for nurses who did physicals for disability claims. They were paid less than physicians for doing the same thing. One argument (that I don’t buy) is that if nurses want doctor pay, they should get doctor education.
I don’t but it because the physicals done for claims are dismal and usually nothing more than a check of vitals.
January 10th, 2008 at 4:05 am
We can bill for our own services and make more money , however it is a pain and most of choose to become employees of a hospital or MD owned group. It is less stressful and allows for more time off.
January 30th, 2008 at 5:43 am
hey bloggers
i am only 14 years old but i am very ambituos
when exploring what interested me for the future
i was very interested in anesthesiology..
do you recommend this career or do you think i
should steer away…i am all for change…
i just dont really understand if it is a good job
or not….
i was also thinking stock broker.. :D
January 30th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Corey: I recommend you communicate with as many anesthesiologists as possible (this is easy in the age of email) to get a sense of what the job is really like … you definitely do *not* want to become a stockbroker, or “used-stock salesman” as I like to call them. You don’t want to be a middleman in the 21st century.
January 31st, 2008 at 8:31 am
ok thanks
April 21st, 2008 at 12:52 am
Why would he not want to be a stock broker?
In my second year as a broker, I made over 200k. My record (U4) is clean and my clients happy?
I know a guy in my office at 30 who is retiring making over a million a year the last 7-8 years. So I ask why not be a “middleman” in the 21st century?
April 21st, 2008 at 11:26 am
Daniel: Can you give us a breakdown on that $200K? What’s salary, bonus, performance-related income etc.? And how many customers do you have in your book to generate $200K in annual income? Thanks.
June 23rd, 2008 at 12:07 pm
I would have never guessed pilots make that much. holy. Same with airtraffic controllers geez.
July 2nd, 2008 at 3:42 am
You don’t have to be a stock broker to make money in the financial field. Quantitative Analysts, who are purely analysts and not traders, have a salary range from $250k to $600k+ . Of course, for these positions, the requirement is typically a PhD in mathematics or another quantitative field and a few years of experience in the field.
In any case, I work as an analyst in the energy sector - electricity specifically. Ever since deregulation, this emerging market is growing, especially with the long-term trend of where energy is heading (limited supply of oil, growing interest in electrcity). I have been contacted by job recruiters from intenrational banks doing financial power trade deals in electricity. Here’s the break-down of cash compensation for power traders (from what these recruiters have told me):
-Junior Trader (new to trading - 1-3 years) : $90k-$120 base with varying bonus - 0-100% or multiples.
-Senior Trader (3 years +) : $120-160k base with varying bonus - 0-100% or multiples or percentage of book
-Director in Trading (5 years + usually) $150-225k base with usually percentage of book for bonus
The salary ranges listed above is just base salary, bonus not included. Bonuses are typically 50% or more of base salary.
August 30th, 2008 at 11:15 am
Im young and consider any good money making career. I have good grades A- average. I will go to any college or university if that is what’s nessary. Have any suggestings?