My working class zip code public schooling presented a narrative that academics make low wages. Later I realize the wages of STEM PhDs in industry. I known this does not generalize among discipline but I regret not taking an academic path.
i think what he meant was, pursuing a PhD opens the possibility of entering academia, and if not, the time and attainment is not wasted financially.
also, he might include that STEM professors earn higher than other academics and have many opportunities to earn high rates of consulting pay, and or spin off to found companies, etc.
It's very hard to come back to high-tier academia from a PhD in industry. Let alone becoming a professor. And clumping STEM together is always a bit silly when we're discussing such topics, not all fields are the same. The opportunity cost and ROI of a PhD in CS is going to be vastly different than one in biochemistry, for instance.
"Academics" usually means "university faculty or people working in research labs." These people tend to make low wages compared to typical industry positions. PhDs also don't tend to open too many doors in industry. At the major tech companies, they are roughly equivalent to 3-6 years of industry experience. They might make a resume more attractive, but you end up going through the same hiring process and largely working on the same stuff.
This is only applicable to a very small subset of STEM academics and is definitely not the expected career outcome for a STEM PhD.
There are indeed people with CS PhDs at Google and Microsoft whose primary job involves publishing papers rather than building applications. But that's not the norm.
