You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Credit Crisis Financial Stocks Short Journal
- Thread starter Daal
- Start date
Interesting study on colleges
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/revisiting-the-value-of-elite-colleges/#more-100956
http://www.irs.princeton.edu/pubs/pdfs/563.pdf
They find that which you college you go to is irrelevant as far as your lifetime earnings are concerned, its your talents that will make or break you(Unless you are in a minority or in the exceptions they mentioned). The princeton guy says its more important to go to college which one you go to is not that important
This seems right to me(I learn way more from doing actual work and reading specific books than any academic professor ever will) but at the same time getting a job is probably easier if you went to a well-know college, that is the social proof effect that Robert Cialdini talks about. If you are incompetent however at some point you will be fired or will never be promoted or at least quickly enough so the guy from the less well-know college will probably catch up at some point and his lifetime earnings will beat yours. At least thats what I speculate happens
I see people who hire giving a damn about which college the person went to all the time so thats how I would merge these 2 conflicting evidences. The same guy who gets impressed by that college the interviewee will be the same who will fire him when he is not productive enough
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/21/revisiting-the-value-of-elite-colleges/#more-100956
http://www.irs.princeton.edu/pubs/pdfs/563.pdf
They find that which you college you go to is irrelevant as far as your lifetime earnings are concerned, its your talents that will make or break you(Unless you are in a minority or in the exceptions they mentioned). The princeton guy says its more important to go to college which one you go to is not that important
This seems right to me(I learn way more from doing actual work and reading specific books than any academic professor ever will) but at the same time getting a job is probably easier if you went to a well-know college, that is the social proof effect that Robert Cialdini talks about. If you are incompetent however at some point you will be fired or will never be promoted or at least quickly enough so the guy from the less well-know college will probably catch up at some point and his lifetime earnings will beat yours. At least thats what I speculate happens
I see people who hire giving a damn about which college the person went to all the time so thats how I would merge these 2 conflicting evidences. The same guy who gets impressed by that college the interviewee will be the same who will fire him when he is not productive enough
The reason I mention this is because I never went to college, till this year. I enrolled in a financial management course in a online college course(Only 2 years). Not that I plan on getting a job anytime soon, this is mostly insurance. In case one day I can't generate any alpha from the markets and income from online poker games at least I have the option of getting a job(both activities are fine at this point but its always important to have insurance)
I didnt read that study before but somehow my intuition told me something similar to their conclusions, I knew I would HAVE to have a college diploma I was not aware however that prestigious colleges dont help you much. It seems that this is evidence for efficient markets given that companies eventually fount out that colleges dont teach the tricks of the trade and its far more important to hire someone who is talented and ambitious, so in the end the wage level(in the long-run) tend to be balanced in the talented people pool regardless of social proof effects of going to big name colleges
I didnt read that study before but somehow my intuition told me something similar to their conclusions, I knew I would HAVE to have a college diploma I was not aware however that prestigious colleges dont help you much. It seems that this is evidence for efficient markets given that companies eventually fount out that colleges dont teach the tricks of the trade and its far more important to hire someone who is talented and ambitious, so in the end the wage level(in the long-run) tend to be balanced in the talented people pool regardless of social proof effects of going to big name colleges
College is to make contacts, meet lots and lots of girls, drink, and go to hoops and football games. What you learn in the classroom (for most, but not all occupations) borders on worthless. I can't overemphasize enough the advantages to having a network of friends and acquaintances from a top-flight school, or just having that school's name on your resume.
Not required by any means, but a lot of fun. I wouldn't deprive my kids of it, but if they've got a better idea than college, I will encourage them to go for it.
http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2011/02/living-life-is-better-than-dying-in-college/
Not required by any means, but a lot of fun. I wouldn't deprive my kids of it, but if they've got a better idea than college, I will encourage them to go for it.
http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2011/02/living-life-is-better-than-dying-in-college/
Quote from ralph00:
http://www.jamesaltucher.com/2011/02/living-life-is-better-than-dying-in-college/
'Its also important that people stop using the statistic: people who went to college make more money. This is a very true statistic but anyone who takes Statistics 101 in college should know that correlation is not cause-and-effect. It could quite possibly be that over the past 30 years, people who are more achievement oriented (and hence more likely to make more money) were more likely to go to college. A better test would be if we take 2000 people who got accepted to Harvard today and divide them randomly into 2 groups: one that goes to college, the other that doesnât, and see what they are earning 5, 10, 20, 30 years from now. (Some people will then say, âbut money isnât everythingâ and I strongly agree, but this is just to counterbalance that one statistic that seems to suggest money is everything)'
I'm not so sure about this point, not just they make more money they also have a lower unemployment rate PLUS I see all the time companies ASKING for a graduate degree in order for someone to apply for a job. That is, if you dont have one, they almost certainly will stop reading your resume half-way through. So yes, while Althucher point could be true, its a speculation and not a very likely one given that evidence against it by all the demands from companies
If it is true, its probably because those people without the degrees found other ways to make money, namely start a business. But in my case that option will not be worth it because I already take quite a bit of risk on my trading, my insurance can't be start a vehicle that is highly likely to fail(Thats what the numbers on startups say) but to apply for a job and start all over
El-Erian Says Political Unrest Adds Stagflationary Winds
http://noir.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.h...//media2.bloomberg.com/cache/vMT_XWuU0tuc.asf
I agree with this, given that the stagflation probability has increased and I wouldn't be as confident the Fed will stay at 0% in the enviroment(Still think they do for 2011 but I'm not as sure) I had to decrease my position size to reflect the decreased confidence. I might trim some more depending on how bad things get in the middle east
http://noir.bloomberg.com/avp/avp.h...//media2.bloomberg.com/cache/vMT_XWuU0tuc.asf
I agree with this, given that the stagflation probability has increased and I wouldn't be as confident the Fed will stay at 0% in the enviroment(Still think they do for 2011 but I'm not as sure) I had to decrease my position size to reflect the decreased confidence. I might trim some more depending on how bad things get in the middle east