408 karma · joined May 28, 2013
Secondly, being a nurse is a HARD job. It's a blue collar job, and it should be (probably was) on Mike Rowe's Dirty Jobs. It's back breaking labor, stressful, and debilitating. Most of my family work in health care, and so far, my cousin has three herniated discs from lifting obese patients over the years, my wife had several blood tests done from being exposed to Hep C patients, and I've known several nurses who have suffered extreme burn out.
Being a PA is marginally better, I suppose, but you're dealing with the same garbage.
There are some definite pros about becoming a nurse over a doctor for sure. But, if you plan on staying on working the floor, become a doctor if you're smart enough. It's still in nearly every regard better than being a nurse on the floor. However, if you have more ambition, you can try to move up the ladder in management and administration as a nurse.
Finally, there are lots of other oppty's for nursing besides beside nursing. If one gets burnt out on patient care, one could move into case management, school nursing, teaching, etc...
It is shockingly absurd how easy and dumbed down they make classes in California's lower echelon schools. They basically hand you everything you need to know on every test on a silver platter: you don't need to read the book; they give you a study guide and EXPLICITLY tell you what will and will not be on the test; they sometimes will outright give you the exam questions, and students STILL screw that up. I took an abnormal psychology class where the instructor gave EVERYONE the exam questions, and students STILL did not show up for the exam or got questions wrong. I was like, HOW THE HELL IS THIS EVEN HAPPENING???!?!
I don't find this system of learning at fault. I find the students at fault. I think they should fail these kids as a costly lesson: study or lose out on $2000 bones. Bunch of nit wits.
http://dcj.state.co.us/ors/images/Stats%20Images/crime%20rat...
I've looked at this many times, and I have done A LOT of research. Ultimately, buying may not be more better than renting, and vice versa. It really depends. The NY Times has a very good Buy vs Rent calculator:
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/business/buy-rent-calcula...
I highly suggest using it to determine whether to buy or not. The biggest problem, though, is there are some assumptions that need to be made that can drastically affect the outcomes. Most importantly: average annual appreciation in rents and home prices. Another is average annual returns on investments and rates of inflation.
The best way to figure these out are to find historical data. I use Redfin to look at houses currently on the market and prices sold 20 to 30 years ago. I also go to the local city hall to look at housing records. For rents, I do a lot more analysis. Anyways, the bottom line is, housing prices should not and usually DO not appreciate faster than inflation. More specifically, median wage growth. And why is this? Because if housing prices increased faster than wage growth, even by 1%, then after 40 years, housing would no longer be affordable. I don't see why people have such a hard time understanding this. I personally like this blog:
http://michaelbluejay.com/house/appreciation.html
He also has a really good buy vs rent calculator with some decent assumptions. You will want to check regional differences, because, obviously, SF and NYC are places that may differ a bit in terms of appreciation and inflation rates. Anyways, I would suggest anyone who is interested in the buy vs rent argument to read that, and then look at their local appreciation rates for housing prices/rent. Assume 2.5% inflation. And then, make a very conservative estimate on the returns of their portfolio (4%). I would then plug and see what the calculators say. I like Michael's calculator more than the NY Time's calc, by the way:
http://michaelbluejay.com/house/rentvsbuy.html
It goes past 30 years.
Also, if you're making an apples to apples comparison, I've found that typically, buying is way better than renting. However, if you're making an apples to oranges comparison, renting a 1/2Br apt. vs buying a 3Br house, it usually always turns out that renting is better than buying. I've done this calculation many times, and invariably, that's what I've learned.
And look at Japan's demographic trends. It's like all of the young people just said to hell with it and are not procreating anymore. I don't blame them either. If all I had to look forward to in life is a meaningless existence of an 80 hr work week to support a small family, I would probably not even go there.
People wonder why this state and municipalities are SCREWED, and they wonder why several cities have filed bankruptcy or have skirted bankruptcy. This is PART, a BIG PART, of the reason.
By the way, if anyone wants to know what Terry Tao, math extraordinaire, is making, you can also find that on the CA gov website.
Hahahaha, yeah, I don't think so. If you guys are really interested in this sort of thing, the MOST important thing is to have a comprehensive database free of biases and errors. For example, survivorship bias is a huge deal, and I wouldn't trust any platform that isn't serious enough to have a historical dataset that is longer than 11 years long to be free of these kinds of things.