So I'm 20 and I've started looking at the salaries of jobs/careers, and this is the impression I've gotten. Like that you could spend years cramming a ton of knowledge about a very niche field, and still only get 2-3x what a run-of-the-mill job makes. Is this true? If yes then I guess this route to wealth would only make sense (due to the diminishing returns) if the topic truly spoke to you, right? Are there alternative career paths to good pay than being really good at something really specific?
To some extent it is accurate. Only a finite amount of knowledge can be applied to a task and excess experience doesn't bring any additional benefit on its own.
The problem is you're comparing labor to labor. Try owning property, that graph has exponential growth with no cieling, you know, like cancer.
You have a point, I guess I forgot to consider Playing The Game. And yeah, investing something off the side does sound like a good idea.
You're out of touch with reality with this idealist conception of wages as a result of knowledge. The value of labor is the cost of its reproduction. Capitalists pay workers exactly as much as they need to for them to turn up again the next morning. Knowledge does not directly factor into their calculation. Don't expect to be rewarded for the work you put into your education - the system isn't fair and doesn't work like that.
Instead, wages are the result of a collective power struggle between labor and capital. High wages occur either when labor is strong and capital weak or when you betray other workers and aid capital in their exploration.
Now expert knowledge is one of many things that might help by increasing bargaining power in the struggle with capital, but it's neither necessary nor sufficient. For example an automotive engineer might have just as much knowledge as a chemical engineer, but where I live, chemistry earns you about 50% more, because the chemistry union is stronger.
So union power, strikes and social movements are a big factor. Others are location, the average rent, international competition, the reserve army of labor. At any specific time, the boom and bust cycle of periodic crisis strongly effects wages.
The organic composition of capital plays an indirect role: If the degree of automation suddenly rises, this will lower workers bargaining power short term and lower profits long term which increases pressure on wages.
So if you want a career with stable, high wages but don't want to help exploit others, look for sectors with a long-term chance of a strong bargaining position for labor.
I don't think there's a strong relation between knowledge and salary. It's more likely demand and supply - if specific skills are in demand, and not many people have them, then pay will increase. And at the highest levels it's often not what you know, but who you know that matters.
Generally speaking, wealth is not built by working. It's built by investing. It's possible to have a relatively small salary and get relatively wealthy if you consistently live below your means and invest the surplus. Power of compounding.
Oh I see, I will keep this in mind. Yeah I suspected that any jobs that got you super good money were not because of the knowledge but because of playing the game/luck.
Is there a field where that red curve is flipped so that each extra aquired unit of expertise earns you exponentially more money?
OP, I gave a funny sort of answer to the question itself, but it occurs to me that I should address your text separately. If you have options, you absolutely should pursue something you feel a bit of passion for, unless your passions are all hella impractical. The sweet spot is something that allows you to not worry about money, and that you don't completely hate or even low-key enjoy. Hell jobs that earn a bit extra and being a starving artist that will break in any time now, I swear both get shit reviews (unless done on cocaine).
At 20, something I didn't realise is that you're not supposed to "get rich". I feel like culture sells the idea that we're all supposed to be Steve Jobs or Elon Musk or something. That's bullshit, even those guys aren't what they claim to be, and the messaging about striving for it is basically propaganda to make people like them feel better. I don't care how smart and amazing you are; real adult life, at it's best, is about earning x dollars, and spending exactly x dollars on a mix of things today and on investments so you can retire down the road.
Also, you said big jobs "only" make 3x a normal job amount, but where I am in life just an extra 10% a month is basically the difference between two very different situations. 3x someone else's salary would make the world your oyster. (Although, most people with money get caught in lifestyle creep and never consider what they actually want)
Another thing my teachers explained to me, but not very well, is that it's hard to know what you enjoy doing up front. Expect to change courses, not because it's helpful (it's rarely so), but because you basically have to as you gradually get the hang of things.
Are there alternative career paths to good pay than being really good at something really specific?
Hazardous jobs, shift work, really unpleasant (even evil) jobs. Education still blows them out of the water, though. IIRC most degree holders eventually earn more than an underwater welder or ice road trucker. Other than that, there is no free lunch. The only way to make money for nothing involves having a much larger sum of money to put in up front.
Edit: Oh, I should also mention the college brochures are full of lies. Most people probably know that, but I was dumb enough to take them sort of seriously. A thousand words of that stuff is worth a couple of sentences water cooler talk on a website like this.
Oh, I should also mention the college brochures are full of lies.
Very good point. They sure know how to sell a vision
At 20, something I didn't realise is that you're not supposed to "get rich". I feel like culture sells the idea that we're all supposed to be Steve Jobs or Elon Musk or something
Thanks, this is very valuable (the rest of your comment as well). Youre right, i guess they got to where they are by just going with the flow given their situation, but if they'd done the same things in another person's shoes (or even just if different coincidences had happened), theyd likely have ended up with a more medicore life.
There is a brief inversion at high salary values where CEOs exist
You don't promote good workers, the job description changes with promotion so the previously good worker might not be (as) good anymore.
Good workers with lots of expertise and know-how get more work.
Amateur. You need to get a PhD to be some tenured fogie's personal whipping boy. /s
If you're looking at actual good paying jobs and not weird passion-fueled ones, or at the other end bullshit nepobaby ones, maybe this is accurate, IDK.
I think there are many good replies already, but I feel one consideration is missing: time.
If you have the time for only one job, why wouldn't you take one paying more, even if it requires a bit more skills to achieve? You are going to do that for a long while, so living more comfortably has a value.
How do you measure expert knowledge on the same graph as salary? Do you measure it in dollars?
