20 best paying jobs in the US

[Monique]

Yes, Zantra, talking about people abusing the system.. that holds very true for a socialist country, and I think The Netherlands serves a good example.

Yesterday I saw the news, there are 1 million people in The Netherlands in working-disability (not sure about the translation) where there are total 7 million people working! The fact was that if you had a bad back, or claimed to have one, you could go into disability without questions asked and even get 100% of your wages! I think the norm was 80% and now they have cut it back to 70%. But still we have a very large influx of foreigners taking advantage of the system.

There are a lot of maroccan and turkish people in the Netherlands, which have the highest percentage of disability, and get a lot of money, without even having worked a single day in this country! So it was on the news yesterday that such foreigners will have to go for examination twice, instead of one, trying to get people to work.

 

[Sonty]

Originally posted by Monique
Yesterday I saw the news, there are 1 million people in The Netherlands in working-disability (not sure about the translation) where there are total 7 million people working! The fact was that if you had a bad back, or claimed to have one, you could go into disability without questions asked and even get 100% of your wages! I think the norm was 80% and now they have cut it back to 70%. But still we have a very large influx of foreigners taking advantage of the system.

There are a lot of maroccan and turkish people in the Netherlands, which have the highest percentage of disability, and get a lot of money, without even having worked a single day in this country! So it was on the news yesterday that such foreigners will have to go for examination twice, instead of one, trying to get people to work.

That's how it starts. Out of a population of 16 million you still have 7 working. out of 23 Romania has 5, while around 6 are retired because of age or "disabilities". Checking them twice doesn't matter. That will mean more bribe to the doctors. It's not wanted also because then those people will count as unemployed and that doesn't look good to the EU. The medium sallary is 100 €, but for how many people?
Both socialism and capitalism sound very good. Different but good. The problem is not the system is those IN the system. Even a good theory goes bad when applied.

Originally posted by Monique
I just looked up what it pays to be a professor in The Netherlands: the lowest as a starter would be: €56604/yr and highest: €89472/yr.. do I see the € fading and the $ twinkling in your eyes?

€89472=$104000

Originally posted by Zantra
I've been to 3rd world countries where thousands of people with MASTERS degrees in fields that are in high demand in the US, cannot find work, simply because the country's economy cannot support it. Meanwhile you have the indivdual over here in the US who slid through life, skipped school, never even attempted to hold down a job or obtain any type of training, and now lives of the government. This is the type of individual who would flourish in a socialist economy and live off the backs of others.

The story of my life, Zantra. And the story of a lot of my friends. Can we replace some of them?
Right now, back home the government is discussing introducing a flat tax system and they are still uncertain about the figure, somewhere between 21 and 24 %.
Oh, and Zantra, I forgot to tell you my conclusion. The vast majority of the americans is not fat at all, but I can feel that "You'll be fine so I don't care about your problems" attitude. I won't open this discussion again.

 

[Zantra]

You missed the point Sonty. The point is that you can't categorize ANY americans because we're all different, just as I'm sure, Belgians are each different. Are there americans who have the traits you describe? No doubt, but no 2 are alike. This is the lesson you must learn. But if you have met 20 Americans, it s a good start.

As far as the selfish attitude, It varies from person to person, but I think every person puts their country ahead of everyone else's to some degree. It's called patriotism. Besides, if you want to know what happens when we "care" about other countries, look no further than the middle east.

 

[Monique]

One CAN talk about a population as a whole, just don't generalize it to the person.

 

[Sonty]

Originally posted by Zantra
You missed the point Sonty. The point is that you can't categorize ANY americans because we're all different, just as I'm sure, Belgians are each different. Are there americans who have the traits you describe? No doubt, but no 2 are alike. This is the lesson you must learn. But if you have met 20 Americans, it s a good start.

As far as the selfish attitude, It varies from person to person, but I think every person puts their country ahead of everyone else's to some degree. It's called patriotism. Besides, if you want to know what happens when we "care" about other countries, look no further than the middle east.

And was I talking about individuals?
I know belgians for the same amount of time as I know these americans. For now I'm still bitterly laughing about the recent meeting between (still) my president and yours, where they had a private meeting, had fun together, looked like the best friends, but the staff didn't even get the right flag to put on the table in front of him. What attitude do you think that shows? And it's at the highest level.
About the middle east... what can I say. I still haven't seen entire nations going out on the streets thanking for the help.
Let's get back to ranking sallaries, should we? As far as I can remember in Romania the best paid jobs were in the backing system and air traffic controllers and pilots. I don't know if the job of being a physicist even exists anymore. It is now just called physics professor and it's paied from 100 € to 250 or 300.

 

[Zantra]

is that 100 euro per year or month>

 

[Sonty]

per month, of course.

 

[Robert Zaleski]

The lawyer you listed can't be a trial lawyer. After shaking hands with one, you have to count your fingers. After you finish counting your fingers, they give you a bill for 200 dollars.

 

[phoenixthoth]

i haven't read the whole thread so i hope I'm not repeating anyone else's remarks...

what about drug dealers, pimps, made men (heads of mafias and such), those practicing investment fraud, etc.? i couldn't find much data on the net. ever heard of the dopewars game? you can now even use crack-whores. it's dope. i find it hard and unrealistic yet more fun than prison sex. i don't think it gives realistic training to become a dealer.

my general, entry-level sense of drug-dealing involves getting drugs from an inner city at something between 50% to 75% of what they sell for in a college town where college kids eat that up big time. so in general theory, you could make at least 33% profit on your investment. also, buying in large quantities of course means you can divide it up and sell the individual parts at a price so that there would be massive profits. you know, like get a sheet of 100 hits of acid and sell it five hits at a time (though i think liquid acid is more popular). there are a few catches including what might happen if you move in on another dealer's turf. oh yeah, and it's illegal... i don't know how some of these dealers don't get caught. or maybe they do and get out soon. you can go down some major streets and buy some crack for $10 in your car from a guy on the street. once i saw this even with cop cars like a block away.

 

[one_raven]

** Clears Throat**

Originally posted by jono
Women launderers £10,195

People get paid to wash women??
Where do you sign up for THAT job?

Originally posted by Monique
100k.. I wonder which percentage goes to IRS?

In the US, you reach the highest tax bracket at about $95,000.
Strictly speaking, that is something like 40 - 45% of your income going back to the Federal, State and Local government.
Of course there are tax breaks and other tircks dishonest people play to keep their money.

Originally posted by Monique
Ofcourse the taxes we pay in the Netherlands are no doubt higher than in the US.. but guess what: the people who earn the most money have to pay a much higher percentage tax.. thus everyone is equal.

Equal?
Your definition of equal must be different than mine.
If some people are more equal than others, equality does not exist.

I am not filthy rich.
I don't have yachts and tax shelters.
I don't own several homes.
Hell, I don't even own ONE home.
I rent.
I grew up poor, in a poor neigborhood.
I drive a used Honda.
I don't travel the world in a private jet.
I work very hard for what I have.
I have been working steadily since I was 13 years old (I am now 32).
I have never had a leg-up from anybody in my life.
But, I pay over $40,000 a year in taxes.
That is almost HALF my paycheck.
So I am being punished for working hard and sacrificing to pull myself up higher.
But Joe Blow, working at the local convenience store to earn just enough money to keep him in weed and twinkies, pays 15 - 17% of his income.
If we paid out the same percentage, I would still be contributing over $18,000 (which is more than he makes in a year).
If EVERYONE paid 17% across the board (from single moms to billionaires) we would have so much more tax money coming in than we do now, we could fire most of the IRS and swindling cheat tax attorneys would have to get real jobs and actually contribute to something.
I should pay more dollars, sure.
But what is the justification for having to pay a higher %?
Then there are people like my father, who feel it is below him to take a job at a gas station, collect unemployment and spend it all at the local bar.
When I couldn't find a job in my field, I worked two full-time jobs at gas stations making less than I did when I was 17 years old, and didn't take a DIME from the government.

No, I am not a cold hearted right-wing bastard who thinks the poor deserve what they get.
I think health care should be government sponsored.
I think the government should offer people a TEMPORARY leg-up when they truly need it.

I think the ideal system would be a balance between:
The Republican ideal of small unobtrusive government and personal freedom...
The Democratic ideal of taking care of those who truly need it...
The Socialist Democrat ideal that our basic needs should be taken care of...
...and my own personal ideal that if you CAN work, you WILL work (at whatever you do best) or you simply don't eat, and your children will be given to someone more responsible.
You should have the right to not work, but if you make that choice, you made that choice.
Be a part of the "society" (I hate that word) or fend for yourself.

To be perfectly honest, I don't even agree with the capitalist system at all.
The ideal, that people that work harder will be rewarded for that hard work, is quite obviously bull****.

People who know and manipulate the tax laws get rewarded.
People who lie, cheat, swindle and steal get rewarded.
People who stay at home pretending they are looking for jobs are rewarded.
People who decide they don't want to work are rewarded (if they know the system).
Honest people who work hard...
We foot the bill for everyone else.

The biggest problem with "the land of opportuinty" is that the we have spoon fed everyone with our golden promises of freedom, opportuinity, entitlements and the all-mighty dollar since the 50's.
We are told from the time we can walk that we have a right to this, and a right to that.
We are free to do what we wish.
Life, Libery and the Pursuit of the easy buck.
But we are not taught that with great freedom comes even greater responsibility.
We have managed to get more demanding and less responsible at the same time.
We want all the luxuries, but no accountability.
We complain that health care cost too much, but we sue doctors for billions of dollars ever year.
We ***** that the public school system sucks, but we ***** when someone wants to spend money on it.
We complain that our taxes are too high, but we vote for people who want to generate more government jobs, more government programs, more government spending.
We complain that all politicians are dishonest, but not only do we vote them in, we allow them to pass the laws that allow them to BE corrupt.
Besides, no one would ever vote for the guy who was honest, anyway.
People don't want to hear the truth.
They want someone to tell them that everything is going to be fine, and their taxes won't go up.

Drugs should be legalized.
However, if you do drugs so much that you can't afford to eat...
Go ****ing hungry!

Ahem...
I guess I got a little off on a tangent there.
Bit of a passionate subject for me.
Doesn't take much to set me off.
I will let it go for now.

Originally posted by Zantra
It only SEEMS that the richer people pay less taxes. While this may be true in practice, it's not by design. Richer people can afford very expensive accountants who can find legal loopholes. they're just working the system. In practice, the percentage of income tax goes UP not down, the higher the pay.

I think we need to define "rich".
Like I said, you reach the highest tax bracket at about $95,000.
I hardly consider that "rich" if rich people can afford "very expensive accountants".
Single people who earn between $45,000 and $125,000, have no children and do not own a home pay the most taxes.
Them, and the struggling small business owners.

Originally posted by Dimitri Terryn
The thing is, having a good degree or being hard working does not make you rich. Being born into money and being well connected does.

Who has been feeding you that self-pitying, pathetic victim complex?
My father was a raging alchoholic who dropped out of school in the 8th grade.
My mother barely scraped by working ****-wage jobs to feed her 4 children.
I never had, nor do I have now any connections.
I don't have any degrees either.
I worked my ass off, and earned what I have with long hours, dedication and work ethics.
Which is exactly why I get so pissed off when people who have no right to what I have earned claim they "deserve" it.

 

[Monique]

If EVERYONE paid 17% across the board (from single moms to billionaires) we would have so much more tax money coming in than we do now, we could fire most of the IRS and swindling cheat tax attorneys would have to get real jobs and actually contribute to something.
I should pay more dollars, sure.

I haven't finished reading your post yet (getting there), but I wanted to comment on what you said there.

First of all, why would single moms have to pay as much % money as billionairs, don't they deserve a break?

Second, we DO need people to operate gas stations, waitresses, conviencience store workers etc, they barely make the minimum wage.. if you want to tax them more, you'd have to increase their wages, which doesn't make sense.

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by one_raven
Which is exactly why I get so pissed off when people who have no right to what I have earned claim they "deserve" it.

So, I finished reading your post

I agree with you that people who work really hard for their money should enjoy it.

The thing that gets to me is the view that rich people work hard for their money, I've never been the head of a company, so I don't know what kind of work they do.. but what is in my head is that their job is to place signatures and hire the best employees :P jk

But to conclude, if you don't want to live in an anarchy, you have to pay money to the government. People who make little money already have a hard time tying the knots, you cannot pluck a bald chicken, so it seems logic to me that the 'burden' is placed on people with more wellware.

Why wonder about a gross income anyway? Why not think: I make $x net a year and that is way more than other people make.. everyone with the same income has to pay the same amount of tax right (basically) so why feel held behind?

 

[adrenaline]

Originally posted by Monique
? why do women make less money ?

Here is an interesting take on the wage gap "myth".see link http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba392/

I agree with most of what it has to say.

For the record, I am a female, senior partner in a business and make hiring and salary decisions so no wage gap exists in my partnership.

 

[Monique]

Everyone is starting to have faces, I like that

 

[Njorl]

Originally posted by adrenaline
Here is an interesting take on the wage gap "myth".see link http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba/ba392/

I agree with most of what it has to say.

For the record, I am a female, senior partner in a business and make hiring and salary decisions so no wage gap exists in my partnership.

I read the article, and on the surface, it is fairly convincing. This line destroys her whole point though:

Women who hold positions and have skills and experience similar to those of men face wage disparities of less than 10 percent, and many are within a couple of points. Claims of unequal pay almost always involve comparing apples and oranges.

She makes this seem like a statement supporting the idea that there is little or no gender discrimination in pay, when it is the exact opposite. A 10% pay deficiency is huge. This was considering all other factors to be equal, ie, women were compared to men in the same field, with the same education and experience.

Njorl

 

[adrenaline]

True. It's not to say that wage discrimination doesn't exist. It does but perhaps to a lesser extent than previously thought. The article does point to the confounding factors that are not clearly delinated when the numbers are crunched to show the pay discrepancy. I do know in the health field, male nurses , on average, have a higher salary than females, and there are no differences in hours worked.

 

[Njorl]

I find nurses to be one of the most confusing employment situations around. There is a nursing shortage, but hospitals do whatever they can to keep nurses wages down. They lay off experienced nurses to hire cheap ones, then lose fortunes in malpractice suits because of incorrect medication administered by overworked and undertrained nurses. Nurses need to go on a good-old-fashioned scab-beating, tire-slashing, nationwide strike.

Njorl

 

[one_raven]

Originally posted by Monique
? why do women make less money ?

We can spend countless hours discussing:
The historical roles of women in society...
The formation of Patriarchal society...
The fact that the concept of equal rights for women is still relatively young and muddling ahead to break outdated stereotypes and concepts...
The evolutionary/biological aspect of men being (on the whole) more aggressive, competitive and physically strong due to testosterone etc...
The common view (though slowly decreasing) that men are better/more suited/more productive (etc) than women at this job or that one...
The concept that, in America, women joined the work-force (as a common occurrence) during WWII in economically depressed times setting a precedent...
The idea that, historically, women HAD to take less money if they wanted a job otherwise the company would have just hired a man...
The imbalanced social construct of men NEEDING more money because they are traditionally the "bread-winners" and supporting their families...
Blah blah blah...
No one will ever agree fully WHY it happened...

Or we can look at the simple answer:
Because it is possible.

If the company can get away with paying women less money to do the same job, they will.
That is not only the result, but the aim of a capitalist system.
"Do what you can to make more money."
It all comes down to the "bottom line".
If women are willing to take jobs that pay less, then they will be paid less.
I know it is not quite that simple, because sometimes it is a survival necessity to take a job that pays less than it "should".
But it really does dome down to that simple fact.
Employers pay women less because employers can pay women less.

 

[one_raven]

Originally posted by Njorl
I find nurses to be one of the most confusing employment situations around. There is a nursing shortage, but hospitals do whatever they can to keep nurses wages down. They lay off experienced nurses to hire cheap ones, then lose fortunes in malpractice suits because of incorrect medication administered by overworked and undertrained nurses. Nurses need to go on a good-old-fashioned scab-beating, tire-slashing, nationwide strike.

Ever spoken to a teacher in the public school system?

 

[Zantra]

Originally posted by one_raven
We can spend countless hours discussing:
The historical roles of women in society...
The formation of Patriarchal society...
The fact that the concept of equal rights for women is still relatively young and muddling ahead to break outdated stereotypes and concepts...
The evolutionary/biological aspect of men being (on the whole) more aggressive, competitive and physically strong due to testosterone etc...
The common view (though slowly decreasing) that men are better/more suited/more productive (etc) than women at this job or that one...
The concept that, in America, women joined the work-force (as a common occurrence) during WWII in economically depressed times setting a precedent...
The idea that, historically, women HAD to take less money if they wanted a job otherwise the company would have just hired a man...
The imbalanced social construct of men NEEDING more money because they are traditionally the "bread-winners" and supporting their families...
Blah blah blah...
No one will ever agree fully WHY it happened...

Or we can look at the simple answer:
Because it is possible.

If the company can get away with paying women less money to do the same job, they will.
That is not only the result, but the aim of a capitalist system.
"Do what you can to make more money."
It all comes down to the "bottom line".
If women are willing to take jobs that pay less, then they will be paid less.
I know it is not quite that simple, because sometimes it is a survival necessity to take a job that pays less than it "should".
But it really does dome down to that simple fact.
Employers pay women less because employers can pay women less.

Consider also the social differences between men and women. Women tend to have children and raise them. Once you get past a certain level, extra hours tend to be required and expected. midlevel management and above can't be realistic about a 9-5 job. The workplace is just too competitive. If there is a salary difference at higher levels, it is due to the requirements of the job. It is the perception that if a woman has a family, she can't commit the time and energy that a lot of single men, or even men with stay at home wives to take care of the kids can. Is this necessarily fair? Yes and no. It could be argued that regardless of sex, if you're unwilling or unable to make the same commitment to a job as a man is, then you loose out. I interact with executives on a daily basis, and yes, there are women in the ranks. 90 percent are single. The rest have children who are older, or stay at home husbands to take care of the kids. If there's a board meeting at 5pm, and you have to leave to pick up the kids from day care, or take little suzie to band practice, you are at a disadvantage. That is why there there is a disparity. Is it fair to penalize someone with a family? Not necessarily, but the needs of the business at most companies come before the personal needs of the individual. When there is a conflict, the needs of the business come first.

This is obviously just one factor among many, and I'm sure if a woman is the most qualified for a position, exceptions are made,but that's the stark reality of it. At some point you have to make a choice between your career and a family. That is why there are so many single, childless women in high level positions.

 

[one_raven]

Monique,

I responded to your replies with this thread:
The more you earn the more they deserve?

 

[Adrian Baker]

In the UK, and many other countries, there is an Equal Pay act that makes it illegal to pay women less. Therefore arguments about 'paying women less' aren't anything at all to do with outright discrimination. It is, as Zantra says, more to do with other factors.

I chose to go into teaching, when my daughter was born so that I could have a good (and enjoyable) career, but more importantly, I wanted time with my daughter. My wife is the 'career first' type of woman who loves the cut and thrust of senior management and is determined to climb 'the slippery pole'.
In my job, all teachers, male and female or on the same salary scale, and there is NO discrimination whatsoever. I earn far less than my wife however, and her salary is far better than some in her line of business, but not as good as others. Being Male or Female is not a factor for her either - it is truly a matter of how talented you are, and how much time you are prepared to dedicate to the job.

Lower pay for women is more a reflection of lifestyle choices they make.
I chose family over job, and hence earn far less than other male friends with similar qualifications and skills.

'Society' or 'discrimination' is not to blame for my so called 'predicament'!

 

[Njorl]

Originally posted by one_raven
Ever spoken to a teacher in the public school system?

Quite often. I am a proud product of the Philadelphia public school system. At my lab, we often employ high school students in a program to give them experience, and I meet many public high school physics teachers. I must say, they are doing a fantastic job. The students I meet are dedicated, enthusiastic and very well taught. I still find it hard to believe how many of them have already completed partial differential equations course before graduating.

The places I've lived have actually had pretty good teacher compensation. I realize they are the exception, not the norm though. Back in the '80's I considered quitting my job as a physicist to go into teaching - for the increase in pay. I'm glad I didn't.

Njorl

 

[adrenaline]

Originally posted by Adrian Baker
.

I chose to go into teaching, when my daughter was born so that I could have a good (and enjoyable) career, but more importantly, I wanted time with my daughter.

Wow! My husband gave up his career as a controls engineer and is now a full time "domestic engineer" for our two year old daughter. It was the only way I could continue my full time work and teaching. Your wife and I are lucky women! It is unfortunate that most people don't realize that the hardest and most important job in the world is still being a parent.

 

[Shadow]

*All data for calendar-year 2000.

Yes that is definately out of date. Just last year i was looking in one of those yearly published books and it said top 16% of astrophysicists/ physicists make over $106,000 and the rest average around 90,000 i believe. Pharmacist should also be on that list. The starting salary is currently around 80,000/85,000 (out of college) and i have a pharmacist in the family that makes well over 90,000 a year...but he has done it for over 20 years

 

[Integral]

A very good paying job has been totally left off the lists. I am making neary $90k/yr as a High Tech industry Technician. For the most part my peers have a 2yr Technical degree, so as far as bang for the buck there are few better degrees to be had. There are a few women, and a few non-Caucausian techs, for the most part we are male white, why? It seems to me that that the hiring practices actually favor non male non white but the pool of qualified people is small and fewer still are not white males, why?

I do not know, it is execellent work, stimulating, and challenging, generally not dirty, with some need to deal with hazardoud materials. I do have to work long hours (get Overtime, which is a substancial portion of my income) and I work graveyard shift, the tools must be kept running.

You need an analytic mind and wide range of technical skills, electronics, electo-mechanical, and pneumatic to hit the main ones these all must be combined with troubleshooting skills.

But look at the pay.

 

[Tyro]

Almost several years back, when I was deciding what career to take, medicine was one of my considerations. High wages and an apparently 'recession proof' career were the selling points of that profession.

It would seem that those figures did not take into account malpractice insurance premiums or the possibility of getting infected by something your patients are carrying. Ungrateful patients would really make my day too.

IIRC psychiatrists also have the highest suicide rates amongst doctors. Pretty ironic.

 

[hasnain721]

http://editorial.careers.msn.com/articles/highestpay/

doctors, doctors, doctors..

1. Surgeons
$65.89/hr
$137,050/yr

2. Obstetricians and gynecologists
$64.15/hr
$133,430/yr

3. Anesthesiologists
$63.31/hr
$131,680/yr

4. Internists, general
$61.03/hr
$126,940/yr

5. Pediatricians, general
$56.03/hr
$116,550/yr

6. Psychiatrists
$54.60/hr
$113,570/yr

7. Family and general practitioners
$52.89/hr
$110,020/yr

8. Dentists
$53.28/hr
$110,820/yr

9. Chief Executives
$51.77/hr
$107,670/yr

10. Airline pilots, copilots and flight engineers
(N/A)
$99,400/yr

11. Podiatrists
$45.43/hr
$94,500/yr

12. Lawyers
$44.19/hr
$91,920/yr

13. Optometrists
$42.35/hr
$88,100/yr

14. Computer and information systems managers
$40.33/hr
$83,890/yr

15. Physicists
$40.26/hr
$83,750/yr

16. Air traffic controllers
$40.07/hr
$83,350/yr

17. Petroleum Engineers
$39.33/hr
$81,800/yr

18. Nuclear Engineers
$38.56/hr
$80,200/yr

19. Judges, magistrate judges, and magistrates
$38.24/hr
$79,540/yr

20. Marketing Managers
$37.70/hr
$78,410/yr

when u say physicists, what do you mean? people who work for companies such as CERN?

 

[_Mayday_]

Physics pays well. But which part of physics?

 

[Darkiekurdo]

What an up.

 

[marlon]

http://editorial.careers.msn.com/articles/highestpay/

doctors, doctors, doctors..

Monique, do you have any information on the average working week of those professions ? I mean, i have a brother who is about to become a radiologist. In addition to that, i have some friends that are specializing to become surgeon. Now, in Belgium, surgeons earn up to 10000-15000 euro's a month (after taxes and working in a bigger hospital) BUT they do have 70-80 hours working weeks !

So, not only the yearly income counts, also the amount of hours you have to work to earn those amounts plays an important role in those statistics !

marlon

edit : i work in the second biggest bank of Belgium. Now, people on the highest level do earn loads and loads of money (10000-20000 euro's per month after taxes, without the benefits likes shares and stuff) but they have incredible working week schedules. Than, you have people earning 3000 euro's after taxes. But they work from 9 to 5 pm. So, who is the richest ?

 

[hasnain721]

Monique, do you have any information on the average working week of those professions ? I mean, i have a brother who is about to become a radiologist. In addition to that, i have some friends that are specializing to become surgeon. Now, in Belgium, surgeons earn up to 10000-15000 euro's a month (after taxes and working in a bigger hospital) BUT they do have 70-80 hours working weeks !

So, not only the yearly income counts, also the amount of hours you have to work to earn those amounts plays an important role in those statistics !

marlon

edit : i work in the second biggest bank of Belgium. Now, people on the highest level do earn loads and loads of money (10000-20000 euro's per month after taxes, without the benefits likes shares and stuff) but they have incredible working week schedules. Than, you have people earning 3000 euro's after taxes. But they work from 9 to 5 pm. So, who is the richest ?

thats true mate but the thing says 'physicists' and not 'physicians'

 

[marlon]

thats true mate but the thing says 'physicists' and not 'physicians'

What the hell do you mean ? I am just talking about doctors, for they ARE the top earners. One should not only look at dazzling figures but also at the dazzling working schedules. What on Earth does this have to do with physicists or physicians ?

marlon

 

[Integral]

Note that all put the last half dozen posts in this thread are over 4yrs old.

 

[hasnain721]

What the hell do you mean ? I am just talking about doctors, for they ARE the top earners. One should not only look at dazzling figures but also at the dazzling working schedules. What on Earth does this have to do with physicists or physicians ?

marlon

First of all calm down, relax have a drink.


Then, re read what i wrote. PHYSICISTS were listed as the top 14th best earners. So my questions was what does a physicist mean because a physicists can be working in any field from optics to nuclear etc etc. So my question was which field of physics could earn you the top 14th position in the league table of the higest earners.




AND u started talking about doctors so i can ask u the same question, "What on Earth does this have to do with physicists or physicians ?"


...and finally, learn some manners.