Wednesday, December 13, 2006
A lot of kids these days feel disillusioned by the kind of work they get after they graduate, even before they graduate. Corporate is not very cool these days, it seems.I don't know if the majority in all schools feel this way, maybe it was just Stephen's and the like. There were few who were very clear of the value of a high paying job. Say Shraddha with the Merril Lynch job. She was undoubtedly thrilled. If I had gotten I'd probably spend a lot of time mulling about, is this all there is to my life.
At this moment you ask me, I have no issues working at any place, as long as it involves a good amount of economics. In some way. An economist at a Investment Bank would be as ideal as a teacher of economics. Sort of like i've chosen my life partner and intended to stay faithful to it. The other aspects regarding hours, or work pressure or existence of the glass ceiling, currently don't matter to me.
I've also seen cases of people very interested in finance feel disillusioned before hand. Sort of like me in my undergraduate days..except I didn't know too much finance.Haha. Anyway now, from a research point of view I think Finance kicks ass, only I am still not mathematically strong to brave the courses. For example, in economics we take linear approximations and they work quite well for most variables. In finance, you deal with variances and volatility. You move to second and third order..which is good stuff. No wonder Indians and Chinese are big in that field..apart from the Jews and Russians and East Europeans..But ofcourse, how well a 'quant' chap can realize his knowledge in Practice is doubtful. Quite fascinating little story about LTCM. Or best is you could just stick to sermonizing and conjecturing, in research papers. I've seens my profs. They seem quite content.
Anyway the point was, lot of discussions going on among economists, how good is the life of say an investment banker.
Here's a link..http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/12/a_theory_of_inv.html
At this moment you ask me, I have no issues working at any place, as long as it involves a good amount of economics. In some way. An economist at a Investment Bank would be as ideal as a teacher of economics. Sort of like i've chosen my life partner and intended to stay faithful to it. The other aspects regarding hours, or work pressure or existence of the glass ceiling, currently don't matter to me.
I've also seen cases of people very interested in finance feel disillusioned before hand. Sort of like me in my undergraduate days..except I didn't know too much finance.Haha. Anyway now, from a research point of view I think Finance kicks ass, only I am still not mathematically strong to brave the courses. For example, in economics we take linear approximations and they work quite well for most variables. In finance, you deal with variances and volatility. You move to second and third order..which is good stuff. No wonder Indians and Chinese are big in that field..apart from the Jews and Russians and East Europeans..But ofcourse, how well a 'quant' chap can realize his knowledge in Practice is doubtful. Quite fascinating little story about LTCM. Or best is you could just stick to sermonizing and conjecturing, in research papers. I've seens my profs. They seem quite content.
Anyway the point was, lot of discussions going on among economists, how good is the life of say an investment banker.
Here's a link..http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2006/12/a_theory_of_inv.html
# posted by qq @ 8:05 PM 
