Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tateco)
    Yeah but economics is a lot more respected and more top unis offer it as well...
    But generally people who don't know why they do what they do are not very good academically, so they find economics too competitive/challenging, etc. Just judging from what I see in my school

    A lot tend to avoid pure econ due to higher level of maths.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Dat Guy)
    But generally people who don't know why they do what they do are not very good academically, so they find economics too competitive/challenging, etc. Just judging from what I see in my school

    A lot tend to avoid pure econ due to higher level of maths.
    I didn't see much of a correlation between knowledge of future career and academic performance - I knew many people at Cambridge who didn't who what they wanted to do in the future.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm doing hist & econ because I know for certain I'll love History, and Econ because I'll probably end up doing something in it. I'm interested in it because it's maths-based and in the news alot, but I wasn't ready to give up History
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tomatochuckers)
    Both are important.

    I wouldn't study a degree which would lead to brilliant job prospects, if I didn't enjoy it, e.g. medicine

    Then again, I wouldn't study a degree I would love if it didn't lead to anything.

    Economics/ related degrees can offer both
    I would tbh, but thats just me. Personally, if I really loved a subject that didnt necessarily have 'good' employment prospects, I'd study it regardless. Luckily, economics is a subject with decent job prospects.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex_hk90)
    I didn't see much of a correlation between knowledge of future career and academic performance - I knew many people at Cambridge who didn't who what they wanted to do in the future.
    I'm referring to a kind of understanding of what a subject entails, what it studies, its domain, etc... I have no knowledge of a future career, but something like 'Why Economics?' or 'why economics matters as a subject' is what I notice many people to avoid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dat Guy)
    I agree, but what careers do you consider soulful?
    Any career which brings us closer to the destruction of the capitalist order, and the establishment of a socialist dictatorship of the proletariat. Something, in other words, which works towards the future; whether through education, and so raising the class consciousness of the masses, the development of economic or political theory, or direct activity against the bourgeois capitalist order.

    Or, tbh, anything that involves interesting economics, rather than the speculative self-aggrandising socially destructive **** that investment bankers do.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tomatochuckers)
    One person in my school said something along the same lines. They are still planning to become an investment banker though....
    I hope you threw scorn upon the capitalist dog, and berated his total lack of commitment to his word.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's an odd and unique situation with Economics. I think it's easier for people to know whether they would be interested in studying Physics, Mathematics or History etc. -- insofar as 18 year olds picking their university courses and future careers know what they're getting themselves into and roughly what they will be studying.

    People who think they are interested in economics are often really only saying they are interested in current affairs, politics; the annual budget, public policy and so on. Then they go to university to study it and find that you don't really learn or discuss much of that at all. After 5 years of studying economics at university, I'm still not interested in current affairs, the economist magazine, the banking collapse etc. IMO, all studying economics does is teach you how to be a good problem-solver. Applicable knowledge you gain from it is limited. Certainly from a macro/micro perspective, it's not too relevant. It's useful to know some econometrics but I have found that the top companies in finance tend to use their own specific algorithms derived by experienced quants which mean that a fresh graduate with a 'working knowledge of EViews' doesn't really help. Though practising collecting data and looking to get a general idea of what's going on is a useful skill.

    I think that economics is a heavily oversubscribed course because people believe that it will lead to a good career. I have no problem with people who choose to study something because they believe it will lead to a good career -- each to their own. But the silly thing is, contrary to popular belief, studying economics doesn't really carry an advantage in the job market. Something like Chemistry, Physics, Engineering opens more doors and leaves the ones in finance open. And purely for finance, Mathematics or Statistics would be a better choice than Economics, generally. The only career that Economics holds an advantage for is working as an economist. Even then, for any decent post, you need a postgrad economics degree (which you can still obtain having done mathematics, physics etc.).

    So yeah, you're all ****ed. Just kidding. But not really.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Overmars)
    It's an odd and unique situation with Economics. I think it's easier for people to know whether they would be interested in studying Physics, Mathematics or History etc. -- insofar as 18 year olds picking their university courses and future careers know what they're getting themselves into and roughly what they will be studying.

    People who think they are interested in economics are often really only saying they are interested in current affairs, politics; the annual budget, public policy and so on. Then they go to university to study it and find that you don't really learn or discuss much of that at all. After 5 years of studying economics at university, I'm still not interested in current affairs, the economist magazine, the banking collapse etc. IMO, all studying economics does is teach you how to be a good problem-solver. Applicable knowledge you gain from it is limited. Certainly from a macro/micro perspective, it's not too relevant. It's useful to know some econometrics but I have found that the top companies in finance tend to use their own specific algorithms derived by experienced quants which mean that a fresh graduate with a 'working knowledge of EViews' doesn't really help. Though practising collecting data and looking to get a general idea of what's going on is a useful skill.

    I think that economics is a heavily oversubscribed course because people believe that it will lead to a good career. I have no problem with people who choose to study something because they believe it will lead to a good career -- each to their own. But the silly thing is, contrary to popular belief, studying economics doesn't really carry an advantage in the job market. Something like Chemistry, Physics, Engineering opens more doors and leaves the ones in finance open. And purely for finance, Mathematics or Statistics would be a better choice than Economics, generally. The only career that Economics holds an advantage for is working as an economist. Even then, for any decent post, you need a postgrad economics degree (which you can still obtain having done mathematics, physics etc.).

    So yeah, you're all ****ed. Just kidding. But not really.
    Good post; I generally agree.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Acerbic)
    You do realise that an economics degree doesn't automatically lead on to investment banking, don't you?

    Or am I the only person to take the approach that it's boring, souless, and generally less desirable as a career than being a geriatric in North Korea.
    I'm not entirely sure why this was aimed at me.

    1. I'm not applying for Economics - I found this thread useful in choosing which degree to take, and also the advise, and dare I say it banter (hate that word!) is enjoyable on this thread, which is why I still occasionally post.

    2. I don't want to go into investment banking, I merely looked at it a few years ago when it was suggested to me.

    and 3. I haven't, in any of my posts, linked the two together. All I have said is that the time involved with investment banking put me off.

    I agree that an Economics degree is attracting the wrong sort of people, especially looking at people I know applying for it - just thinking about potential jobs in the end of it whilst they sit in lessons obviously not interested in the subject :rolleyes:

    I am aware actuarial work is also time-consuming, but it appears more flexible in that respect - whilst this didn't attract me to wanting to persue the profession (the actual content did) it did play a factor in that I do want more of a life outside of work as well.
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    I don't really understand why there is such a stigma around wannabe investment bankers. I agree that people wanting to do economics for the sole purpose of getting into investment banking are deluded, as a science or maths degree would probably be better suited. They are also arguably easier to get into and easier to perform highly in if you are scientifically minded. However, I don't understand why people are slightly embarrassed to say investment banking is what they want to do or why people would frown upon someone who is planning to go down that route. Education is important to most of us on here, but for most people it is a way to get a job, and who cares if that job is banking? How is it any different from becoming a lawyer or an accountant?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -Illmatic-)
    I would tbh, but thats just me. Personally, if I really loved a subject that didnt necessarily have 'good' employment prospects, I'd study it regardless. Luckily, economics is a subject with decent job prospects.
    "Choose a job you love, and you will never have to work a day in your life" - confucius :moon:
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Tateco)
    I don't really understand why there is such a stigma around wannabe investment bankers. I agree that people wanting to do economics for the sole purpose of getting into investment banking are deluded, as a science or maths degree would probably be better suited. They are also arguably easier to get into and easier to perform highly in if you are scientifically minded. However, I don't understand why people are slightly embarrassed to say investment banking is what they want to do or why people would frown upon someone who is planning to go down that route. Education is important to most of us on here, but for most people it is a way to get a job, and who cares if that job is banking? How is it any different from becoming a lawyer or an accountant?
    Bankers haven't had the best press recently - they're painted as having caused the financial crisis (not completely true, though also not completely false), and then having taxpayers bail them out while they continue to receive huge bonuses even while they're failing (also not false).
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by alex_hk90)
    Bankers haven't had the best press recently - they're painted as having caused the financial crisis (not completely true, though also not completely false), and then having taxpayers bail them out while they continue to receive huge bonuses even while they're failing (also not false).
    But that seems to be more of an institutional flaw than the responsibility of individuals. The same issues occur in law, albeit on a smaller and less influential scale but things still go wrong.
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Tateco)
    But that seems to be more of an institutional flaw than the responsibility of individuals. The same issues occur in law, albeit on a smaller and less influential scale but things still go wrong.
    That may be the case, but by choosing to work in that industry you are clearly supporting and participating in this institution.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone help me answer this...

    Discuss the effectiveness of reducing Government spending in order to reduce demand pull inflation. (18 marks)

    So far i have
    . defined Government spending and DP inflation
    . Written about the different branches of government spending
    . Drawn the diagram and have written--- C + I + G + (X-M)
    . Written about the extent to which you have to cut Government spending as there are other influences e.g. imports
    .And have written about ceteris paribus

    Any help would be greatly appreciated

    Why the negs?
    • PS Helper
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    PS Helper
    (Original post by bhogs001)
    Can anyone help me answer this...

    Discuss the effectiveness of reducing Government spending in order to reduce demand pull inflation. (18 marks)

    So far i have
    . defined Government spending and DP inflation
    . Written about the different branches of government spending
    . Drawn the diagram and have written--- C + I + G + (X-M)
    . Written about the extent to which you have to cut Government spending as there are other influences e.g. imports
    .And have written about ceteris paribus

    Any help would be greatly appreciated
    Multiplier. How government spending can influence the larger parts of AD, how it depends on what is reduced as well as an overall reduction, reverse accelerator process etc.

    Not necessarily straight-forward to cut government spending due to political pressures
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bhogs001)
    Can anyone help me answer this...

    Discuss the effectiveness of reducing Government spending in order to reduce demand pull inflation. (18 marks)

    So far i have
    . defined Government spending and DP inflation
    . Written about the different branches of government spending
    . Drawn the diagram and have written--- C + I + G + (X-M)
    . Written about the extent to which you have to cut Government spending as there are other influences e.g. imports
    .And have written about ceteris paribus

    Any help would be greatly appreciated
    on the other hand, you can argue how a deflationary policy / austerity measures are not popular and therefore it might harm the government especially as it's goal is to be re-elected. Also such policies that lead the economy to a recession or stagnation, some dangers might be increased unemployment and social difficulties (ie. greece today). You can argue how the central bank can reduce demand pull inflation without risk of dismissal and popularity lost (since the people don't elect the central bank). hope it helps
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jsalgado)
    on the other hand, you can argue how a deflationary policy / austerity measures are not popular and therefore it might harm the government especially as it's goal is to be re-elected. Also such policies that lead the economy to a recession or stagnation, some dangers might be increased unemployment and social difficulties (ie. greece today). You can argue how the central bank can reduce demand pull inflation without risk of dismissal and popularity lost (since the people don't elect the central bank). hope it helps

    (Original post by Tateco)
    Multiplier. How government spending can influence the larger parts of AD, how it depends on what is reduced as well as an overall reduction, reverse accelerator process etc.

    Not necessarily straight-forward to cut government spending due to political pressures

    Thanks for your help guys!!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    GUYSSSSSSSSSS!!! (and girls)

    My UCAS torment is over, I have heard from ALL my universities.

    UCL have given me an L101 offer!!!!! I AM IN TATTERS, my dream course!
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 4, 2012

University open days

  1. University of Bradford
    University-wide Postgraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  2. University of Buckingham
    Psychology Taster Tutorial Undergraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  3. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Campus Visit Undergraduate
    Wed, 1 Aug '18
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.