Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Which graduates are most likely to make 50k+ in their careers? Watch

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelzzz)
    Locums always earn more, thats not surprising.
    I've seen that document and theres nothing there saying 40 hours a week, it could include part time.
    Of course going private is difficult, it would require specialist training. Point is, 100k is perfectly attainable as a dentist if you are to do specialist training and or work hard.
    GPs also train longer than dentists and they do work longer hours.
    I have also been looking into this and i agree with mariobros. The full report says dentists working 35-45 hours earned 69k. If you average it, a dentist working 40 hours should be on slightly less. probably 65-69k. The point is that budding dentists should be aware of the difficulty in becoming fully private. Every dentist is prepared to work hard. How else would they be dentists? And from all dentist only the top 5-10% would be fully private, reflecting just how difficult it is to get to that stage and be the top of all dentists. If you look at all GPs, you will see the top 10% earners who take home 300k a year.The daily mail is full of reports on them. Does that mean you can tell all future doctors that they can make 300k if they become GPs with some hard work? No. Always look at the averages coz that is what most lkely you will be earning.

    And no GPs don't work ridiculously more hours than dentists. A salaried gp will work 40 hours a week coz thats what he is contracted to do. He won't go out of his way to do more work coz he wont be paid for it. Practise owners however will work longer hours as they are running a business, however the hours they work won't be much different than Dental practise owners who also run a buisness.

    And GPs train for 4 more years than dentists. Not exactly lifetimes apart.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by infumed)
    I have also been looking into this and i agree with mariobros. The full report says dentists working 35-45 hours earned 69k. If you average it, a dentist working 40 hours should be on slightly less. probably 65-69k. The point is that budding dentists should be aware of the difficulty in becoming fully private. Every dentist is prepared to work hard. How else would they be dentists? And from all dentist only the top 5-10% would be fully private, reflecting just how difficult it is to get to that stage and be the top of all dentists. If you look at all GPs, you will see the top 10% earners who take home 300k a year.The daily mail is full of reports on them. Does that mean you can tell all future doctors that they can make 300k if they become GPs with some hard work? No. Always look at the averages coz that is what most lkely you will be earning.

    And no GPs don't work ridiculously more hours than dentists. A salaried gp will work 40 hours a week coz thats what he is contracted to do. He won't go out of his way to do more work coz he wont be paid for it. Practise owners however will work longer hours as they are running a business, however the hours they work won't be much different than Dental practise owners who also run a buisness.

    And GPs train for 4 more years than dentists. Not exactly lifetimes apart.
    4 years is a long time, its like doing dental school all over again. Especially when you consider a dentist could become a implantologist/ortho etc in that time with a part time degree so they'd be earning whilst doing it. Not to mention, an ortho/implantologist works a LOT less hours earning around the same.

    Also, 70k for 35-45 hours when you're not even a principle dentist is ****ing incredible when you think about it
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    True.

    And MPs in central London do things MPs in rural Wales do not.
    That's true as well.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1drowssap)
    You're seriously comparing the two?
    First of all, CEO is a title, not a job. A politician does a specific job('serve' the constituency).
    I'm pretty sure being CEO of an FTSE 100 company is harder. To become a person with a political appointment, you need to be able to sweet talk. If you have the gift of the gab, I'm sure becoming an MP wouldn't be anywhere near as hard as being a CEO of an FTSE 100 company.
    Being an MP is going to be pretty difficult. They tend to have good educations, and be of a reasonable age by the time they get selected to run as an MP. Then, you have to run for election every few years.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Nursing
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    Being an MP is going to be pretty difficult. They tend to have good educations, and be of a reasonable age by the time they get selected to run as an MP. Then, you have to run for election every few years.
    It's definitely no walk in the park becoming an MP, but it is not impossible. Comparing CEOs to politicians, I'd still say becoming a CEO(of an FTSE 100 company) is harder. Anyway, I was referring to what it takes to do the job when I said that. I have a feeling that they work harder trying to get into office than actually when in office. I'm of the opinion that many doctors/lawyers/engineers/investment bankers work a lot harder than them.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1drowssap)
    It's definitely no walk in the park becoming an MP. I was referring to what it takes to do the job when I said that. I have a feeling that they work harder trying to get into office than actually when in office. I'm of the opinion that many doctors/lawyers/engineers/investment bankers work a lot harder than them.
    Yes, I would agree with that (with respect to backbenchers. The cabinet are going to have to work very very hard). But I think it's so difficult (relatively speaking) for them to get into office, that it's not a "likely" career choice to make £50 000+.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    Yes, I would agree with that. But I think it's so difficult (relatively speaking) for them to get into office, that it's not a "likely" career choice to make £50 000+.
    That is true. So I guess the politicians should thank us for the comfortable careers we have given them, and actually work harder to do what they're supposed to do.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Has anyone heard of the new management degree at ucl?? I wanted to do economics there but probably won't get in so was going to apply to queens Mary/Nottingham to do economics there but some people say that the uni brand is more important and doing the management bsc at ucl would be better, what do you guys think??


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1drowssap)
    That is true. So I guess the politicians should thank us for the comfortable careers we have given them, and actually work harder to do what they're supposed to do.
    Ever met an MP?

    You could say the same of CEOs since their compensation is 80x higher.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    A job in finance.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelzzz)
    4 years is a long time, its like doing dental school all over again. Especially when you consider a dentist could become a implantologist/ortho etc in that time with a part time degree so they'd be earning whilst doing it. Not to mention, an ortho/implantologist works a LOT less hours earning around the same.

    Also, 70k for 35-45 hours when you're not even a principle dentist is ****ing incredible when you think about it
    You clearly have no idea what your talking about. Getting on the orthodontist MDent is a ridiculously taxing process on its own. Most unis ask for ATLEAST 2 years post dentistry in working in a hospital plus the MFDS/MJDF to just be considered. The competition is intense. Then if by some miracle you manage to get on the course, its an extra 3-4 years FULL TIME to complete it. Then once ur an orthodontist, ur just an orthodontist with no experience. You need to work in the NHS for atleast 4-6 years before you can even think about applying to private practises. All in all, it'll take you atleast 6 years post dentistry to make it as an orthodontist, and then you have to build a track record so you need to add a few more years. Then at that stage, im sure everyone will agree, you deserve a 100k salary.

    Definitely not the easy route to earn that much
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Ever met an MP?

    You could say the same of CEOs since their compensation is 80x higher.
    Well, the big difference is probably one uses tax payers money, the other doesn't. For FTSEs, they are private companies, and as far as I'm concerned, they are allowed to pay whatever the hell they want to their CEOs.

    MPs, on the other hand, are public servants, who are supposed to do things solely for the benefit of the people. By making the pay high, you are only attracting the wrong kind of people. Increasing pay may attract more people who are doing it to get monetary gains, rather than wanting to serve the public.

    So, yes, you can make the MP's compensation 10X or even 20X higher if you feel that they are not paid enough. But realise that it is coming out from your own pocket, and that may just attract those who want to do it for the money.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1drowssap)
    Well, the big difference is probably one uses tax payers money, the other doesn't. For FTSEs, they are private companies, and as far as I'm concerned, they are allowed to pay whatever the hell they want to their CEOs.

    MPs, on the other hand, are public servants, who are supposed to do things solely for the benefit of the people. By making the pay high, you are only attracting the wrong kind of people. Increasing pay may attract more people who are doing it to get monetary gains, rather than wanting to serve the public.

    So, yes, you can make the MP's compensation 10X or even 20X higher if you feel that they are not paid enough. But realise that it is coming out from your own pocket, and that may just attract those who want to do it for the money.
    I think you miss the point about why MPs are paid in the first place.

    Also the majority of MPs take a pay cut to enter the House.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 1drowssap)
    Well, the big difference is probably one uses tax payers money, the other doesn't. For FTSEs, they are private companies, and as far as I'm concerned, they are allowed to pay whatever the hell they want to their CEOs.

    MPs, on the other hand, are public servants, who are supposed to do things solely for the benefit of the people. By making the pay high, you are only attracting the wrong kind of people. Increasing pay may attract more people who are doing it to get monetary gains, rather than wanting to serve the public.

    So, yes, you can make the MP's compensation 10X or even 20X higher if you feel that they are not paid enough. But realise that it is coming out from your own pocket, and that may just attract those who want to do it for the money.
    Just pointing out they arent on a level with renumeration.

    MPs equate closer to senior management/ directors. So saying there are fewer FTSE CEOs is a bit of a misnomer in this context.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    A high salary is going to help pay off debts for sure but if all things were equal what would ppl most want in their job?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCareersGuy)
    A high salary is going to help pay off debts for sure but if all things were equal what would ppl most want in their job?
    I personally couldn't give a damn about paying off my debt, I like to think of it more as a tax because of how big it's going to be paid off. I want a high salary just for the sake of having more money. But money aside, the second thing I look for most is probably travel opportunities

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Key123)
    I think you miss the point about why MPs are paid in the first place.

    Also the majority of MPs take a pay cut to enter the House.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That is true. They could have earned so much more outside.
    But MPs shouldn't think of it that way. Instead of thinking "Oh, I made a sacrifice to become an MP. I should deserve this amount," it should be "I have been given an opportunity to serve the people. Let me make society better."

    I guess the issue I have with the pay is that the salary should be more of a gesture of gratitude by the government, to recognise their contributions, rather than an incentive for a person to become an MP. The incentive should be wanting to serve the people.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCareersGuy)
    A high salary is going to help pay off debts for sure but if all things were equal what would ppl most want in their job?
    People change during their lifetime and so do their interests. 17/18 years old is a ridiculously young age to decide what you want to do for the rest of your life and so you're bound to change your opinion.
    I think going for a career where a high salary, job security and you can see yourself doing is more important than doing 'what you love NOW'. Speak to people 10 years older than you with a child, they'll tell you the same thing.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheCareersGuy)
    A high salary is going to help pay off debts for sure but if all things were equal what would ppl most want in their job?
    Learning opportunities, career progression and exit opportunities.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources

    Articles and guides:

    Hands typing

    Degrees without fees

    Discover more about degree-level apprenticeships.

    A-Z of careers Advice on choosing a careerCV writing helpCovering letter helpInterview tips

    Featured recruiter profiles:

    CGI logo

    CGI is open for applications

    "Offering a range of apprentice and sponsored degree positions."

    Deutsche Bank logo

    Deutsche Bank is recruiting

    "Thrive in an international banking environment"

    ICAEW logo

    Merck

    "Merck is a global leader in specialized pharma & chemicals – join us!"

    Army logo

    The Army is recruiting now

    "With hundreds of roles available, there’s more than one way to be the best."

    Bianca Miller, runner-up on The Apprentice

    Handle your digital footprint

    What would an employer find out about you on Google? Find out how to take control.

    Quick links:

    Unanswered career sector and employment threads

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.