compared to other students, are IB/finance students more susceptible to corruption?

<p>Sometimes when I look at some finance students (pretty high-performing pedigreed or international ones who go to McIntire) it seems that they have a lower sense of ethics than others.</p>

<p>Or suppose you were hired by some pretty influential companies (try Goldman Sachs) and were then told to assist the company in tax avoidance or loophole schemes. Wouldn't most of you regard that as a completely acceptable thing to do?</p>

<p>Nice attempt at justifying not getting a decent job.
The answer is no, they're not less ethical.
They're just smarter and work harder.</p>

<p>You majored in a hobby and are now regretting that mistake.
Shocker. </p>

<p>Also, those in tax are the ones whose job it is to find loopholes in tax codes and reduce the amount of taxes. These are accounting majors, not finance majors.
Learn the difference. </p>

<p>Do you even have the slightest clue what investment bankers do? (waiting for the standard wikipedia'd generic response)</p>

<p>Also, I'm sure your parents(assuming they actually have a job) take advantage of whatever deductibles they can as well.
Does this mean they have a lower sense of ethics than others who don't?</p>

<p>
[quote]

Nice attempt at justifying not getting a decent job.
The answer is no, they're not less ethical.
They're just smarter and work harder.</p>

<p>You majored in a hobby and are now regretting that mistake.
Shocker.

[/quote]

Great. I know many who majored in a hobby (Mechanical Engineering or Computer Science). They're screwed now!</p>

<p>...or did you mean they majored in a "social science"?</p>

<p>They majored in photography....</p>

<p>What wrong with social sciences?</p>

<p>I'm a researcher in biochemistry, which is far more productive to society than your kind will ever be. We make drugs and cures, and save lives. I study harder math and physics than your stupid kind that complains about finance exams, which are infinitely easier than statistical thermodynamics or quantum chemistry. </p>

<p>Did I mention I've had internships in the Department of Energy?</p>

<p>You came to the investment banking forum because....?</p>

<p>Dept of Energy? Couldn't get a private sector gig huh?</p>

<p>Not that it matters, but I'm relatively certain you're wrong about having taken more challenging math courses.
To my knowledge, partial diff equations, random processes and Fourier analysis are not commonly taken by those who work in biochem.
These types of courses are expected for anyone pursuing finance beyond an undergrad level.
You haven't taken stochastic calculus or any other upper level finance course. How can you possibly know which one is more difficult?
Finance employs more math and physics phds than nearly any other field outside of academia.</p>

<p>You also have to realize, without finance, there is no funding for any of these major research firms.</p>

<p>Lastly, accounting is very different from finance. Comparing them is like comparing patent law with biochem.</p>

<p>
[quote]
To my knowledge, partial diff equations, random processes and Fourier analysis are not commonly taken by those who work in biochem.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>but that's because I'm majoring in biochemistry and *physics<a href="oh%20snap">/i</a></p>

<p>and that kind of subject material is trivial...I use Fourier transforms across a wide variety of disciplines, from electron microscopy to NMR, to genetics and mRNA expression. Partial differential equations model the Circadian genes that I work with. The fact that you wave those subjects around as though knowledge of them makes you special, shows how much of an intellectual lightweight you are.</p>

<p>but even if I weren't majoring in physics, you have no business making presumptions about biochemistry majors, who pursue diverse concentrations. even if I were Jefferson's yeoman farmer with an SAT score of 1500/2400 who attended community college, my suspicion would still be valid.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You haven't taken stochastic calculus or any other upper level finance course. How can you possibly know which one is more difficult?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>those are hardly difficult subjects. I make computer games out of Markov chains. please, I worked with stochastic calculus in the summer of my first year of undergrad. (for Peter Fields...group-centred multilevel selection and population dynamics, using Silene latifolia as a model organism ....which hey, also has a lot of differential equations.)</p>

<p>partial differential equations you say? what a copout. have you tried solving the Schrodinger equation for water? have you tried using initial stress tensor states to calculate fracture propagation and final fracture length in hydraulic fracturing natural gas extraction across the Marcellus Shale?</p>

<p>The arrogance of finance students is interesting -- it's no wonder they are some of the most unethical, parasitic creatures on Earth.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You also have to realize, without finance, there is no funding for any of these major research firms.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I wasn't talking about finance. I was talking about finance students. It's kind of like the difference between TFA teachers and education majors.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Lastly, accounting is very different from finance.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>finance students AFAIK take accounting exams; it's kind of considered a core requirement.</p>

<p>so what do you guys think about the long-term validity of the Brownian model of financial markets, particularly Black–Scholes? do you guys ever critically think about what you do before mindlessly applying memorised investment formulas? rarely; because you're never encouraged to think about what things really mean, unless they tangibly aid your career or monetary advancement.</p>

<p>the arrogance of finance textbooks (which I have read) is also laughable. physics textbooks try their utmost to simplify beautiful yet complex ideas to the reader (take the Rabi cycle); finance texts try their utmost hide the laughable simplicity of their ideas behind unnecessary Greek.</p>

<p>Angryelf is merely living up to his name, cut him some slack...=P</p>

<p><3!!!Evitaperson!!!<3 Love it when someone who thinks they know everything about everybody and everything gets shown that this isn't the case...(; And I've also noticed how no one answered your original question. =P </p>

<p>Props to you(:</p>

<p>*evitaperon. Slip of the finger, not the mind(;</p>

<p>Generally ineffective longterm due mainly to difficulty in forecasting volatility and "black swan" events not accounted for by the pde. B-S-M also rests on the assumption that the world is risk neutral, which clearly isn't the case. GARCH(1,1) models and svm rarely predict volatility at more than a 50% accuracy even in the short term. Even to acheive these results, you need volatility clustering in the forecasted data set, which there is no way to test for ex-poste.
Personally, I've only worked in structuring /valuation in swaps so my knowledge really doesn't extend to derivatives.
Contrary to your beliefs, upper level courses for me at least were almost entirely proofs and derivations. The assumption is that anyone can memorize and apply an equation so there is no need to test it.
Yes, finance majors are almost entirely unnecessarily cocky, but it's almost out of necessity. Without confidence, you won't get through the interview process.
Once you're in, the amount of college juniors sucking up to you in an attempt to get an interview really gets to your head.
Honestly, I could care less what you think of my coursework. You seemed a bit misinformed about the coursework finance majors take and I listed it as an example.</p>

<p>*ex ante, not poste.
@incognito no one answered the original question because it was an ignorant generalization. The second portion also has nothing to do with what most if not all would ever do.
No finance major that didn't switch over to accounting would ever be asked to do it in the first place.</p>

<p>...and the bigger nerd award goes to...</p>