<p>You see guys what I’ve been telling you? Math majors have no business in finance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Business-Musings-From-Woodstock-for-Capitalists:</a> Personal Finance News from Yahoo! Finance](<a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/107029/Business-Musings-From-Woodstock-for-Capitalists]Business-Musings-From-Woodstock-for-Capitalists:”>http://finance.yahoo.com/insurance/article/107029/Business-Musings-From-Woodstock-for-Capitalists)</p>
<p>You made an “I-told-you-so” thread?</p>
<p>Seriously?</p>
<p>Epic fail, dude. Epic.</p>
<p>Just because you don’t need high-order Math in Finance doesn’t mean Math majors can’t do finance.</p>
<p>My dad majored in Math, my cousin majored in Math, my uncle double majored in Econ/Math and they ALL went into Finance and are pretty damn successful. Newsflash, you sure don’t need to study Finance to have a career in it, and you don’t need to study Business to go into that either. Having a Math BS shows employers you’re smart.</p>
<p>You always try to disparage Math and call it useless. If you hate it, then don’t major in it, no one’s making you. But what bothers me is potential Math majors read your posts and they might get discouraged. You’ve been brainwashed by this idea that if you study X, you must do X for the rest of your life. Well that’s bs. Most of our generation goes to college to get a BA/BS in anything we like, then we go on and find jobs in the real world. Outside of a handful of professions, undergrad years aren’t meant to train you for a job. Diligence, interpersonal skills and street smarts will land you a lot of jobs.</p>
<p>Great advice, molly. Sadly enough, there are many people like pmvd who believe that their major is going to dictate the rest of their lives. It’s quite ignorant, really.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It depends on your definition of “smart”. I hate to say it (yes, I hate to say it, because at first I had a hard time believing it), but being “good” at math says little about a person’s overall level of intelligence. I am “good” at math by most people’s standards, but have a hard time synthesizing information, communicating clearly, and doing something that almost everyone takes for granted: coming across as a normal person.</p>
<p>By the way, Molly, why don’t you show that article to your dad, cousin or uncle? I wonder what they will say.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are right. You could always write off your investment in a college education and go back to school to study a subject that might help you pay the bills and put bread on the table.</p>
<p>How about this: major in math if you want to learn about math. </p>
<p>If you want to make money, go to business school and learn about getting drunk and networking. </p>
<p>And if you have no social skills, you better be damn good at something.</p>
<p>I’ve never met a person who would argue against themself to the extent that you do, pmvd.</p>
<p>Business math is a bit different then regular mathematics. The elements are essentially the same but the operations are completely different. I’ve been working in business and fiances for a while now and I don’t know intense algebra and calculus. They aren’t that necessary.</p>
<p>I disagree with Buffet though; I think using a calculator is needed when making purchases, at least a basic calculator.</p>
<p>Buffet is old fashioned.
higher mathematics are used in finance primarily in application to derivatives. Buffet’s statement discrediting mathematics as a financial tool stems from his general attitude regarding derivatives “I view derivatives as time bombs, both for the parties that deal in them and the economic system.” also not that Buffet lost money this year along with all of the other “math” guys.</p>
<p>Mathematics are used to deduce a conclusion from known facts. Since there are very few facts in finance that are “known,” the input into these models is up to the user’s discretion. Therefore, what is wrong is not the mathematics, it is the original premises upon which the model is built. The one that caused the financial meltdown was that everyone supposed that prices of homes would rise indefinitely. If you make such a stupid assumption, then no amount of mathematics can help you.</p>
<p>@ pmvd - I wouldn’t be surprised if they agreed with Buffett. But you missed my point, I wasn’t disagreeing with Buffet - what do I know about finnance? I was disagreeing with you saying:
Not true. Just because you don’t need advanced math in finance doesn’t mean math majors have no business in that profession. I’m an Econ major, most of the stuff I learn I will never use on the job. </p>
<p>My point is major in whatever you like. In many professions, it often comes down to interpersonal skills, networking, diligence and street smarts over book smarts. Employers often won’t care whether it’s a Bachelor’s in Econ, Business, Math, Physics, or whatever. They just want someone who gets the job done.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But that’s my problem, out of those things you mentined, the only thing I have is diligence. That’s why I care about studying a subject that will be of use to me in the future. I can’t afford the luxury of fooling around in college and then rely on my social intelligence to find a good job. I don’t have it that easy.</p>
<p>This whole thread reeks of ignorance.</p>
<p>Higher math used in modeling has its limitations. Guys like David Li (from the Gaussian Copula story in the WSJ) know the problems associated with their models. It’s the MBA, business-only ■■■■■■■■ people who believe that something like VaR is all you need to know.</p>
<p>The problem isn’t the modeling; it’s the people who believe that it is correct like gospel.</p>
<p>If you want something good to read, look up some Nassim Taleb.</p>
<p>pmvd, you’re missing a bit of complexity here. First off, there are two types of finance: there’s the type that requires lots of schmoozing, networking, and those types of skills (which I think of as “business”, not “finance”). Then there’s the type of investment banking that’s gotten very glitzy recently, which is a lot more analysis and a lot less people skills. This is what “quants” (quantitative analysts) do.</p>
<p>There are also two kinds of math. There’s everyday math, the kind you use in business, engineering, and other fields, which is mostly algebra, calculus, and statistics. Then there’s math math, which you’re only likely to apply if you’re a mathematician or theoretical physicist; this includes fields like group theory, analysis, number theory, and topology. A pure math major studies these fields.</p>
<p>When you study pure math, your university is in theory preparing you to be a mathematician. However, it turns out that you pick up a rather nebulous but incredibly useful skill set along the way, which is usually referred to as “problem solving”. Problem solving is the skill set you need to solve mathematical problems, and it involves not just synthesizing information, but forging your own paths to a solution. It requires a lot of insight, creative thinking, a sharp mind, and the ability to see through the problem and understand it on a higher level. These skills, incidentally, are what interviewers are looking for when they ask those “puzzle” questions that everyone likes to rip on.</p>
<p>And it turns out, these are precisely the skills that financial firms look for in quants. So if you’re a math major, and you’re very good at what you do, quant firms want you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ok.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s the type of math I like.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s the type of math I don’t like.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And what if you study applied/everyday math?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There is some truth to that, but being able to get good grades on a math test is not the same as solving a puzzle in real time, in front of an interviewer. At school, you can spend an entire evening working on a problem set if you need to, and by the time you take the test, the problems are usually taken straight out of the problem set. But when you go to a job interview, they want to see you think on your feet, quickly, and they’ll likely throw a problem at you that’s not like the problems you learned to solve in school, it’s likely to be a problem that requires, in your own words, “a lot of insight, creative thinking, a sharp mind, and the ability to see through the problem and understand it on a higher level”.</p>
<p>So no, it’s not the same.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It depends on what you mean by “very good at what you do”. I can, for example, get A’s in math classes, but I don’t consider myself “very good” at it. It could be that the education at the school I go to is dumbed down…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You go to a top-30 school. Most likely not.</p>
<p>Stop feeding the ■■■■■.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then how come I can do well academically but suck at almost everything else?</p>
<p>
Cause you’re a Math geek. Good for you. Most people aren’t particularly good at many things; at least you’re good at academics. It’s much better than only being good at say, Ceramics, but sucking at everything else. </p>
<p>Sly gave you a lot of good info there. There’s a job out there for people like you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fine. But what’s the point of being a math geek if I’ll never be able to find a job that has anything to do with math?</p>
<p>Wow dude, you’ve got to be kidding me. What’s so hard about:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Becoming an engineer. You won’t need anything past Multivariable Calc or PDEs at some places and you get a high starting salary. No social skills required either if you’re content with low-level positions.</p></li>
<li><p>Sucking it up and realizing you may not have the best social skills. Big deal? If people with Asperger’s can get jobs, so can you. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>You must be ■■■■■■■■ this board.</p>