[DynamicSyngery]

(Original post by es.c)
I think age shouldn't play a part in who can write on these forums, after all, this is a 'student' forum. Besides, I have high hopes, and really am listening to what you more experienced people who have to offer and appreciate your time and advice, unlike many others my age

I don't mean you're too dumb to understand, I mean so much will change in the time before you have to make these sorts of decisions that anything you think now is going to end up substantially changed anyway.

General advice:

1. Go to the most prestigious possible university.

2. Try to get a 1st (important for post-grad, not so much for jobs).

3. Do an internship at least one summer.

[es.c]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
I don't mean you're too dumb to understand, I mean so much will change in the time before you have to make these sorts of decisions that anything you think now is going to end up substantially changed anyway.

General advice:

1. Go to the most prestigious possible university.

2. Try to get a 1st (important for post-grad, not so much for jobs).

3. Do an internship at least one summer.

Okay thanks. Can you do internships from AS to A2 summer or does it have to be when you're in university? And would it be worth taking a gap year to get into a more prestigious uni after rejection or accept a less prestigious one straight away ?

[Irrelevance]

(Original post by es.c)
Is it worth getting a postgraduate degree? Or would it be more worthwhile to go into employment after undergraduate degree and begin life?

As everybody's mentioned it all depends on your career path. Some jobs have a minimum post grad qualification pre-requisite and so there's no option. Others will ask for experience in which case you need to start low and work your way up.

Decide where you want to be first and then if post grad is necessary. Personally, I wouldn't do more education than the required level i.e. doing a PhD when you only need a BSc just because.

[maskofsanity]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
On what basis? For income, a career beats postgraduate degrees hands down in almost all cases. If it's a dream of yours to become an academic that it's different.

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
Who knows? That depends on a lot of factors, some to do with your degree, some not. But if your degree isn't, the vast majority of postgraduate study available won't improve things.

Lol. Please stop stating your opinion as fact. You're only just graduating this year so logic tells me that you haven't tried getting a job after a Masters, as well as before a Masters. Hence, it's likely that you're spouting these claims based on anecdotal evidence (and yes, I am aware that you're on a four year course - I am still confident you know diddly squat about recruitment, aside from conjecture).

OP - if you just want high pay, and honestly don't care what you do like you said (I think your view on this will change once you start working, however) then get a First at whatever university you are currently at, get relevant work experience/internships and do an Econ masters at a top university. These three will give you a good advantage over the thousands who just stumble out with an undergraduate. This is obvious, and those saying anything to the contrary are either trying to sound controversial or just giving plain silly advice.

[DynamicSyngery]

(Original post by maskofsanity)
Lol. Please stop stating your opinion as fact. You're only just graduating this year so logic tells me that you haven't tried getting a job after a Masters, as well as before a Masters. Hence, it's likely that you're spouting these claims based on anecdotal evidence (and yes, I am aware that you're on a four year course - I am still confident you know diddly squat about recruitment, aside from conjecture).

Aside from talking to a lot of managers and recruiters. Is that anecdotal? In a sense - I didn't speak to every manager and recruiter, and they may have lied to me. But on that basis it would still be anecdotal even if I had worked 20 years and become a manager with hiring powers myself. I still couldn't speak for the others!

My advice is this: don't assume a masters' degree is worth anything. Maybe some are worth something. If you think so, talk to employers first and find out. Otherwise you're gambling real money for only a chance of better employability. Better to keep the money in almost all cases.

OP - if you just want high pay, and honestly don't care what you do like you said (I think your view on this will change once you start working, however) then get a First at whatever university you are currently at, get relevant work experience/internships and do an Econ masters at a top university. These three will give you a good advantage over the thousands who just stumble out with an undergraduate. This is obvious, and those saying anything to the contrary are either trying to sound controversial or just giving plain silly advice.

According to your other posts you are a final year economics student. What is the basis fof your own conjecture here? Getting a first is fine; probably no one cares outside academia but if you can keep up with everything else there's no down side. Doing a masters in econ has a downside: to the tune of a lost year and >£15k in fees and living expenses.

The way to get a job is to get an internship in second year and then be hired by that company. That's how almost everyone in the top paid professions - cosultancy, banking, etc. - are hired. The masters route is a delaying tactic for people who didn't make it first time.

[maskofsanity]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
Aside from talking to a lot of managers and recruiters. Is that anecdotal? In a sense - I didn't speak to every manager and recruiter, and they may have lied to me. But on that basis it would still be anecdotal even if I had worked 20 years and become a manager with hiring powers myself. I still couldn't speak for the others!

My advice is this: don't assume a masters' degree is worth anything. Maybe some are worth something. If you think so, talk to employers first and find out. Otherwise you're gambling real money for only a chance of better employability. Better to keep the money in almost all cases.


According to your other posts you are a final year economics student. What is the basis fof your own conjecture here? Getting a first is fine; probably no one cares outside academia but if you can keep up with everything else there's no down side. Doing a masters in econ has a downside: to the tune of a lost year and >£15k in fees and living expenses.

The way to get a job is to get an internship in second year and then be hired by that company. That's how almost everyone in the top paid professions - cosultancy, banking, etc. - are hired. The masters route is a delaying tactic for people who didn't make it first time.

I'm not the one posting controversial claims all over the forum so there is no burden of evidence on me, but, as I am a student also, obviously mine can only be anecdotal. E.g. my brother works at PwC on the economic consultancy stream (guess what, he has a First and a Masters). Of course there is a downside in cost and time - as with everything! How do you expect to outshine others without putting some time and money in?

About internships - It's common sense that an internship is incredibly important but that's just one part of your application. How do recruiters differentiate between all these hundreds of candidates with an internship and an honours degree? Postgraduate studies, degree classification, university prestige, interview etc. etc.

I'm not saying that a Masters and a First guarantee jobs, that's absurd, I'm simply saying that with a saturated market of undergrads with 2.1s, it's a logical move to set yourself apart from the average. What you're trying to do is sound dramatic and controversial, as many TSR posters like to, in order to sound convincing. It's simply not true that outside academics no one cares about a First, and that an Econ Masters won't give you an advantage. More importantly, if you honestly think that everyone undergoes a Masters as a delaying tactic, then you are heavily misinformed (or, more likely, not informed at all and just speculating).

[DynamicSyngery]

(Original post by maskofsanity)
I'm not the one posting controversial claims all over the forum so there is no burden of evidence on me,

You posted your own advice which is that the best way to maximise your income is to do a masters degree in economics. This is by no means obvious. You then attacked my experience when you are in an even worse position, I having actually completed a masters-equivalent qualification, without telling anyone that you're just a year 3 BSc student.

but, as I am a student also, obviously mine can only be anecdotal. E.g. my brother works at PwC on the economic consultancy stream (guess what, he has a First and a Masters). Of course there is a downside in cost and time - as with everything! How do you expect to outshine others without putting some time and money in?

To be a job-titled economist you need postgraduate study, as I already said in this thread. The question is, is becoming a job-titled economist the best way to maximise your income, since OP has expressed no particular interest in being one beyond that? In my opinion, in most cases the answer is no.

About internships - It's common sense that an internship is incredibly important but that's just one part of your application. How do recruiters differentiate between all these hundreds of candidates with an internship and an honours degree?

Simple: at the end of the internship they call you into an office and offer you a job, unless you are incompetent or there is a hiring freeze. The other hundreds who didn't do an internship or did it somewhere else are not present to compete. It's also a false dilemma: even if you're unlucky or don't want to work there, most grads do not have any blue chip internship on their CV.

Postgraduate studies, degree classification, university prestige, interview etc. etc.

Fixed.

I don't know if you've ever actually been interviewed for a job but once you get to that stage no one gives much of a damn what you did in university exams. I've had interviews for 'finance' jobs where MDs have told me they think academic economics isn't even a science.

I'm not saying that a Masters and a First guarantee jobs, that's absurd, I'm simply saying that with a saturated market of undergrads with 2.1s, it's a logical move to set yourself apart from the average.

You're saying that:

1. Employers care about masters degrees in general, not just in a few specific relevant technical fields.

2. Employers care about them enough to offer you more money at the margin than the degree costs, in general.

3. Employers care about them more than anything else that you could reasonably spend a year and £15k doing.

I think these claims are all suspect and by the time we get to #3 are hardly ever true, again outside a couple of fields (petroleum engineering being one, and economics not being one, again in general).

What you're trying to do is sound dramatic and controversial, as many TSR posters like to, in order to sound convincing. It's simply not true that outside academics no one cares about a First, and that an Econ Masters won't give you an advantage. More importantly, if you honestly think that everyone undergoes a Masters as a delaying tactic, then you are heavily misinformed (or, more likely, not informed at all and just speculating).

It gives you an advantage compared to being in prison for a year. In general it is not a good use of time or money. It will be for some people, at least given their personal goals, but to tell a 17 year old that he should already start planning to pay for one of these expensive masters courses before he's even sat a university exam, had any work experience, or even decided what he wants to do with his life is stupid and irresponsible.

[sj27]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
I've had interviews for 'finance' jobs where MDs have told me they think academic economics isn't even a science.

I'm presuming that opinion didn't come as a surprise to you

[sj27]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)

The way to get a job is to get an internship in second year and then be hired by that company. That's how almost everyone in the top paid professions - cosultancy, banking, etc. - are hired. The masters route is a delaying tactic for people who didn't make it first time.

This is just far too general to be true. I'm sure it applies to some people, there are many it does not apply to. Like I said, there are people in IB who got there through master's degrees with no internships on their records. The options within IB are so broad that you simply cannot generalize like that.

[maskofsanity]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
You posted your own advice which is that the best way to maximise your income is to do a masters degree in economics. This is by no means obvious. You then attacked my experience when you are in an even worse position, I having actually completed a masters-equivalent qualification, without telling anyone that you're just a year 3 BSc student.

Not anyone - the OP.

"Just" a BSc student! Congratulations: you were born one year earlier than me; you're on a joint masters course and looking to do a PhD... something tells me employment isn't on your mind. Nor in fact is a high income, making you no better in this debate. The majority of people on the STUDENT room are students, surprisingly. Hence, why I am skeptical about the dubious claims people like yourself state as facts.

To be a job-titled economist you need postgraduate study, as I already said in this thread. The question is, is becoming a job-titled economist the best way to maximise your income, since OP has expressed no particular interest in eing one beyond that? In my opinion, in most cases the answer is no.

I agree. Never mentioned anything about economists...

Simple: at the end of the internship they call you into an office and offer you a job, unless you are incompetent or there is a hiring freeze. The other hundreds who didn't do an internship or did it somewhere else are not present to compete. It's also a false dilemma: even if you're unlucky or don't want to work there, most grads do not have any blue chip internship on their CV.

Load of rubbish. Generalising as usual.

I don't know if you've ever actually been interviewed for a job but once you get to that stage no one gives much of a damn what you did in university exams. I've had interviews for 'finance' jobs where MDs have told me they think academic economics isn't even a science.

Of course they don't; your academics lead you to your interview. After that, it's all about you as a person. That is obvious, but thank you for stating it.

You're saying that:

1. Employers care about masters degrees in general, not just in a few specific relevant technical fields.

2. Employers care about them enough to offer you more money at the margin than the degree costs, in general.

3. Employers care about them more than anything else that you could reasonably spend a year and £15k doing.

I think these claims are all suspect and by the time we get to #3 are hardly ever true, again outside a couple of fields (petroleum engineering being one, and economics not being one, again in general).

1. They care about a relevant Masters degrees, yes.
2. No, I never said that. Graduate starting salaries are obviously fixed.
3. No, I never said that either. I'm sure there are more radical things you could do with £15k capital but a) radical is risky and b) a Masters is satisfactorily beneficial and not risky.

It gives you an advantage compared to being in prison for a year. In general it is not a good use of time or money. It will be for some people, at least given their personal goals, but to tell a 17 year old that he should already start planning to pay for one of these expensive masters courses before he's even sat a university exam, had any work experience, or even decided what he wants to do with his life is stupid and irresponsible.

Right...?

Stop generalising. And what on earth are you dribbling on about? The OP asked between undergrad or undergrad and postgrad to maximise chances of getting a good job; I told him how to stand out, i.e. First class honours, internship, masters. There is nothing stupid or irresponsible about that but as usual, you're all about the melodrama.

[DynamicSyngery]

(Original post by maskofsanity)
1. They care about a relevant Masters degrees, yes.
2. No, I never said that. Graduate starting salaries are obviously fixed.
3. No, I never said that either. I'm sure there are more radical things you could do with £15k capital but a) radical is risky and b) a Masters is satisfactorily beneficial and not risky.

It's really simple - a masters degree is an investment like any other. It costs something, let's say £15k. It's worth it if it nets more than £15k in the future, plus interest. So if you're not saying it'll do that, you're not saying masters degrees are worth doing.

What are the circumstances in which masters degrees could pay back the £15k?

1. When you get interviews for higher paying jobs you otherwise wouldn't be considered for.

2. When you get chosen over other candidates for higher paying jobs you would be interviewed for anyway.

Now the key disagreement we're having is, I think that academics are only going to get interviews, and even at that point, you only need to meet the minimum to put a tick in the academics box; doing better won't help you much. Once you get to the interview stage academics are going to be a negligible distinguishing factor between candidates, with experience and personability dominating. So a masters degree is only really useful when you need it to get interviews, and there are only a very small number of cases in which a masters degree (and a specific one, not just any) can do this.

I think the same mistake is underlying your belief that getting a 1st is important. I haven't met anyone outside academia who cares much about 1sts, and some who have said they regard 1sts as a mild negative. (Though, for completeness, firsts can be very important for academia so you should still try to get one if you don't know what you want to do).

(Original post by sj27)
This is just far too general to be true. I'm sure it applies to some people, there are many it does not apply to. Like I said, there are people in IB who got there through master's degrees with no internships on their records. The options within IB are so broad that you simply cannot generalize like that.

I'm sure there are people working in IB with all sorts of masters degrees which may or may not have helped them get a job. I'm thinking more of those 'Finance' MScs that charge gullible internship rejectees £30k to apply for the same jobs that are done by people with bachelors degrees that cost the same for 3 years plus living expenses.

Of course those too can pay off if they get you an interview and then you get a job and then you stick with it for a few years to pay down the loan. But it's rather a big gamble with a lot of money at stake.

[sj27]

(Original post by DynamicSyngery)
x

Did you ever answer my question about how long you've worked in IB for?