Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ironman
I stand corrected on both counts: (i) the differential is about 15,500, not 5,500; and (ii) the time is three years, not five (I was thinking of total post-graduate).

The point remains correct, however: the foregone salary is about 300,000, plus tuition if one is unable to get a waiver. The differential is 15,500* 30, about 500,000, very comparable.

To make the computation correct, one has to discount the stream of cash flows differentials, whereas the foregone salary occurs up front. The net present value of the salary differential seems about the size of the foregone salary even when tuition is not taken into account.

To summarize: (i) one cannot judge whether it is wort it to get a Ph.D. by looking at the salary, and (ii) the monetary value of the Ph.D. is negligible.

35 posted on 09/28/2003 2:06:50 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies ]


To: TopQuark
I basically agree. Sometimes a master's can be gotten in one year plus a summer session making it even a better choice.
66 posted on 09/28/2003 4:52:23 PM PDT by ironman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson