Pages

  • Sharebar

The following e-mail has been going around on the Street recently. I thought I might share it:

We are Wall Street. It's our job to make money. Whether it's a commodity, stock, bond, or some hypothetical piece of fake paper, it doesn't matter. We would trade baseball cards if it were profitable. I didn't hear America complaining when the market was roaring to 14,000 and everyone's 401k doubled every 3 years. Just like gambling, its not a problem until you lose. I've never heard of anyone going to Gamblers Anonymous because they won too much in Vegas.

Well now the market crapped out, & even though it has come back somewhat, the government and the average Joes are still looking for a scapegoat. God knows there has to be one for everything. Well, here we are.

Go ahead and continue to take us down, but you're only going to hurt yourselves. What's going to happen when we can't find jobs on the Street anymore? Guess what: We're going to take yours. We get up at 5am & work till 10pm or later. We're used to not getting up to pee when we have a position. We don't take an hour or more for a lunch break. We don't demand a union. We don't retire at 50 with a pension. We eat what we kill, and when the only thing left to eat is on your dinner plates, we'll eat that.

For years teachers and other unionized labor have had us fooled. We were too busy working to notice. Do you really think that we are incapable of teaching 3rd graders and doing landscaping? We're going to take your cushy jobs with tenure and 4 months off a year and whine just like you that we are so-o-o-o underpaid for building the youth of America. Say goodbye to your overtime and double time and a half. I'll be hitting grounders to the high school baseball team for $5k extra a summer, thank you very much.

So now that we're going to be making $85k a year without upside, Joe Mainstreet is going to have his revenge, right? Wrong! Guess what: we're going to stop buying the new 80k car, we aren't going to leave the 35 percent tip at our business dinners anymore. No more free rides on our backs. We're going to landscape our own back yards, wash our cars with a garden hose in our driveways. Our money was your money. You spent it. When our money dries up, so does yours.

The difference is, you lived off of it, we rejoiced in it. The Obama administration and the Democratic National Committee might get their way and knock us off the top of the pyramid, but it's really going to hurt like hell for them when our fat a**es land directly on the middle class of America and knock them to the bottom.

We aren't dinosaurs. We are smarter and more vicious than that, and we are going to survive. The question is, now that Obama & his administration are making Joe Mainstreet our food supply...will he? and will they?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YWE4YmE2Y...

21 2

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews. Learn More.

Comments (102)

  • ke18sb's picture

    @moneyneversleeps

    Your point brings up an interesting question, if your premise is in fact correct, that the success of main st is dependent on the success of wall st (which I disagree with to a degree), doesn't that mean that the industry itself is too powerful, or in other words too big to fail. Isn't that part of the very root of the argument for financial reform. Why should one industry, in this case finance, have such a large sphere of influence that if it fails everyone fails as well.

    In finance speak, you're implying that the American economy is a very unbalanced portfolio. Thus we need to reallocate our investments (industries) to mitigate our risk. We need to practice risk management and proper portfolio allocation, tenants of intelligent finance, to ensure the lasting success of the American economy. Whether you realize it or not, you're arguing for financial reform.

  • Slacker23's picture

    This is off topic, but I just wanted to point out that this is the 2nd topic with a picture of a lion in the past few days....

    Maybe to go along with the whole jungle/monkey theme of WS? Just thought I'd point it out.

  • GekkotheGreat's picture

    @ ke18sb

    The guy is angry and just trying to make a point. He is saying people on Wall Street will always adapt and survive, which I agree.
    So what if some of the stuff he said is arrogant, logically unsound and completely off base. He is not trying to write his PHD research thesis.

  • GekkotheGreat's picture

    Also he is mad at Main street always portraying themselves as the victim. Everyone in this society is more or less a self-interested entity. If you didn't understand what you were investing in, and lost money, because some wall street salesman talked you into it, are u really completely innocent. My guess is this is not the first you are fooled. Orange County? LTCM? Asian financial crisis? Dot-com bubble? Investors never learn their lessons from those events and they portray themselves as the victim every time. Fool you twice, shame on you...

    I mean, for Christ's sake, some corporate bond, which had a 10% yield a year ago, has 1% yield now... And we are still in the crisis...
    Who knows what will happen when shit hit the fan in commercial real estate mortgage securities

  • In reply to holymonkey
    Slacker23's picture

    holymonkey:

    Which makes the basic premise of finance a gamble.

    Having seen the Great Recession and having lost a bit of money myself, I for one will never be buying any financial instrument that isn't guaranteed.

    I'd say everything in life is a gamble. No future events have 100% certainty. Finance is a way of managing that inevitable risk. Even guaranteed products are only as good as the guarantor. I mean look at Vallejo, California municipal bonds... they were guaranteed by the full faith and credit of that city, but that didn't work out so hot.... Or Greece - their guarantee isn't quite as meaningful as it used to be.

    Plus there's the risk/reward trade off. Investors are rewarded for taking risk. Otherwise you get a portfolio of t-bills that get eaten away by inflation. Even something like a house could be considered a financial asset. You have to be able to accept a certain level of risk in order to make it in this world.

  • In reply to Slacker23
    GekkotheGreat's picture

    @ Slacker23 and Holymonkey

    Exactly...

    If you are this risk averse, why would u ever consider working on Wall Street?

    Traders are wrong and lose 70% percent of time when they are trading, but the good ones cut loss fast when they are losing, and bet huge when they are in favor (30% of the time)... Kind of like Blackjack, betting spread is why you can beat the dealer.

  • In reply to holymonkey
    mxc's picture

    holymonkey:
    Which makes the basic premise of finance a gamble.
    No, rather "which makes prices reveal information". Calling finance a gamble is too easy.

    Also, why did the industry become so "bloated"? Industries just don't grow out of the blue. The MBS industry depended on skewed regulatory incentives. Are financiers to blame if they took advantage of that opportunity? Should they have avoided the subprime bandwagon for moral reasons (if only they knew about the incoming trainwreck)?

    There are very legitimate reasons for why finance exists in the first place. Transferring wealth through time, capital allocation,... While there is a good case for tackling moral hazard and contagion risk, I don't see the rationale for banker bashing.

    The only legitimate argument has its roots in political philosophy; the idea that it's simply wrong to have people make 20 times Joe Sixpack's salary. I can understand why some people would think that, but then why would we accept that Tiger Woods make 50m a year while slaying call girls?

  • anonymousman's picture

    Here's what your missing.

    When the banks fall down - it isn't the influx of high talent workers that will destroy main street.

    No.

    It's the fact that businesses can't use investment banks to grow - there will be no jobs, because we, as bankers, will have stopped creating them. Blankfein said that we do 'God's work'. I think I'd go a little further. Since God doesn't exist, he doesn't do any work. That is not the way to describe your average banker.

    Bankers are the gravity that keeps this world spinning. We make it so that businesses can keep going, we make it so they can grow and offer more jobs to the expanding population.

    Kill the banks and there won't be any jobs for us to run to. The world will come crumbling down into the dark ages.

    The ascent of industrialisation grew at the exact rate of the ascent of money. We finance growth - get rid of us - get rid of growth.

    We break out backs working shifts that main street have never even dreamed, we protect you whilst you sleep, and for that we can hold our heads high.

    You shouldn't feel immoral for making money, your shouldn't feel immoral because you are doing something most people cannot do. You should feel humbled and proud. And they should feel grateful that we help to keep bread on their table.

    Kill us and you will cut off your own air supply.

  • In reply to anonymousman
    rebelcross's picture

    anonymousman:
    Since God doesn't exist, he doesn't do any work.

    Was that really necessary?

  • In reply to GekkotheGreat
    holymonkey's picture

    GekkotheGreat:
    @ Slacker23 and Holymonkey

    Exactly...

    If you are this risk averse, why would u ever consider working on Wall Street?

    Traders are wrong and lose 70% percent of time when they are trading, but the good ones cut loss fast when they are losing, and bet huge when they are in favor (30% of the time)... Kind of like Blackjack, betting spread is why you can beat the dealer.

    I considered working on Wall Street before, but not anymore. Screw it. I'm gonna be a tax lawyer. You know, those people that you pay $500 an hour to hide your 8 figure incomes overseas because you don't want to pay the IRS and to fend off the IRS when it starts harassing you.

    So a 70% chance of loss and 30% chance of gain-sounds like a negative EV (to have a 0 EV, the expected gain has to be 7/3 of the expected loss). The statistical probabilities don't justify taking that risk, at least to me. At least if I had a portfolio of T-bills the principal is safe. I prefer to sleep at night rather than worrying about someone eating my lunch while I'm asleep. And if the US defaults on its treasuries I have more important things to worry about than my investment portfolio.

    That said, I don't want Wall Street to fail, I want it to not be so damn powerful and bloated that it brings down the whole country when it goes down in flames. And I want it to stop taking such ridiculous risks.

    "We are lawyers! We sue people! Occasionally, we get aggressive and garnish wages, but WE DO NOT ABDUCT!" -Boston Legal-

  • In reply to holymonkey
    AfricanPropTrader's picture

    holymonkey:

    I considered working on Wall Street before, but not anymore. Screw it. I'm gonna be a tax lawyer.


    Translation: I wanted to be a banker but got rejected everywhere. So now, I'll hate on the industry that rejected me.
  • In reply to AfricanPropTrader
    holymonkey's picture

    AfricanPropTrader:
    holymonkey:

    I considered working on Wall Street before, but not anymore. Screw it. I'm gonna be a tax lawyer.


    Translation: I wanted to be a banker but got rejected everywhere. So now, I'll hate on the industry that rejected me.

    I'm still an undergrad and have no interest in finance anymore. Stop assuming everyone wants to be like you. I lost interest when Bear went under and never looked back. I didn't bother trying for it because even if I got an IB analyst gig I would have quit within a year to go to law school.

    "We are lawyers! We sue people! Occasionally, we get aggressive and garnish wages, but WE DO NOT ABDUCT!" -Boston Legal-

  • In reply to holymonkey
    Slacker23's picture

    holymonkey:

    I considered working on Wall Street before, but not anymore. Screw it. I'm gonna be a tax lawyer. You know, those people that you pay $500 an hour to hide your 8 figure incomes overseas because you don't want to pay the IRS and to fend off the IRS when it starts harassing you.

    ah... Here lies the root of this debate. Some people are more risk-averse than others. I have always found accountants and lawyers to have very different personalities than the finance types.

    Accountants/Lawyers = slow & steady wealth
    Finance = Swing for the fences, always sprinting

    The difference is that finance types may blow themselves up in the process of success. But that's the price you pay in pursuit of that 8-figure income mentioned above, as opposed to your guaranteed $500/hour.

The WSO Advantage - Land Your Dream Job

Financial Modeling Training

IB Templates, M&A, LBO, Valuation. Learn More.

Wall St. Interview Secrets Revealed

30,000+ sold & REAL questions. Learn More.

Resume Help from Finance Pros

Land More Interviews. Learn More.

Find Your Mentor

Realistic Mock Interviews. Learn More.

  • holymonkey's picture

    The problem is when the finance types blow themselves up they blow up the whole economy with them. That needs to stop. And the Fed needs to stop enabling such behavior. I'm fine with them blowing themselves up all they want as long as it doesn't cause systemic risk and failure.

    "We are lawyers! We sue people! Occasionally, we get aggressive and garnish wages, but WE DO NOT ABDUCT!" -Boston Legal-

  • In reply to holymonkey
    GekkotheGreat's picture

    holymonkey:
    GekkotheGreat:
    @ Slacker23 and Holymonkey

    Exactly...

    If you are this risk averse, why would u ever consider working on Wall Street?

    Traders are wrong and lose 70% percent of time when they are trading, but the good ones cut loss fast when they are losing, and bet huge when they are in favor (30% of the time)... Kind of like Blackjack, betting spread is why you can beat the dealer.

    I considered working on Wall Street before, but not anymore. Screw it. I'm gonna be a tax lawyer. You know, those people that you pay $500 an hour to hide your 8 figure incomes overseas because you don't want to pay the IRS and to fend off the IRS when it starts harassing you.

    So a 70% chance of loss and 30% chance of gain-sounds like a negative EV (to have a 0 EV, the expected gain has to be 7/3 of the expected loss). The statistical probabilities don't justify taking that risk, at least to me. At least if I had a portfolio of T-bills the principal is safe. I prefer to sleep at night rather than worrying about someone eating my lunch while I'm asleep. And if the US defaults on its treasuries I have more important things to worry about than my investment portfolio.

    That said, I don't want Wall Street to fail, I want it to not be so damn powerful and bloated that it brings down the whole country when it goes down in flames. And I want it to stop taking such ridiculous risks.

    It's not a negative EV. Since you only have probability, you won't be able to calculate the expected value. Btw Tax lawyer is a good choice.

  • yesman's picture

    The author of this letter has serious cognitive dissonance; the letter is amusing, that it's attracted a fan base is alarming.

  • soitwouldseem's picture

    Here is my perspective as a recent graduate that does not want to be a banker.

    Just because you are a good banker does not mean that you would be a good engineer, a good teacher, a good small business owner, etc. I would bet money that being engineer (one that designs projects) is a little more difficult then being a banker. Engineers need to have an understanding of mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc that not all bankers could master. No offense, but finance is a blow off major, and I would bet that your entry level positions at banks are basically glorified but well compensated bitches.

    Owning a small business is also very difficult. When you start, you have to be willing to work very hard (as hard as any banker), for almost nothing, and what your working at in usually manual and not fun. And If I had to be a high school teacher for the rest of my life, I would use the sepku knife, because contrary to popular opinion teachers work hard and are constantly shit upon by a bunch of immature dbags.

    To those of you who think that you are going to be able to hop on to law. First take the LSAT its harder than the gmat. Then to make all that money that you are having wet dreams about realize that you must first get into a top 14 law school, and then you have to be in the top 15% of your class.

    Lets not pretend that just because you are a banker, you can do anything else. If I was going to list the ten most difficult jobs-banker would not be one of them.

    All this crap about banking being the foundation of the economy, and that we would go back to the dark ages without banking is retarded. You could have all the banking you wanted, but if you didnt have innovators like Tesla and Edison etc, a legal code that has evolved through the centuries, we would not be very far away from the dark ages. The economy needs banks to supply loans to individuals and businesses. That is all. The machine will go on without the tens of thousands of bankers-it wont run as smoothly, and it might suck for quite a while, but dont pretend what bankers do is essential.

    Finally, for the record, everytime someone says that this reminds them of Rand and Gault they admit that they are retarded.

  • big unit's picture

    HAHA SOMEONE WANTS TO BE A TAX LAWYER!!!!

  • In reply to ke18sb
    ideating's picture

    Wow... I disagree with the initial email but this post is even more stupid.

    ke18sb:
    So here it goes then. Why I think this is a pathetic ramblings of an uneducated douche bag.

    We are Wall Street. It's our job to make money....Just like gambling, its not a problem until you lose...well now the market crapped out....well here we are

    The first two paragraphs make finance sound unsophisticated. Its almost as if the writer is conceding all it was is a giant bet that lost. This makes finance sound simplistic while making the traders that lost come off as unintelligent gamblers that ran out of luck. He is implying that traders were just playing a game and lost and people should stop whining about it. Its asinine for 2 reasons. One, finance is not that trivial. Two, if it is, then your'e admitting that traders aren't a cut above the rest, rather people that was given the keys to a car that they didn't know how to drive.

    What's going to happen when we can't find jobs on the Street anymore? Guess what: We're going to take yours. We get up at 5am & work till 10pm or later. We're used to not getting up to pee when we have a position. We don't take an hour or more for a lunch break. We don't demand a union. We don't retire at 50 with a pension. We eat what we kill, and when the only thing left to eat is on your dinner plates, we'll eat that.

    Yes, certainty you are going to apply your work ethic to a non-financially lucrative field. As if its your ethos driving you to work so hard is not the money. Laughable.

    For years teachers and other unionized labor have had us fooled. We were too busy working to notice. Do you really think that we are incapable of teaching 3rd graders and doing landscaping? We're going to take your cushy jobs with tenure and 4 months off a year and whine just like you that we are so-o-o-o underpaid for building the youth of America. Say goodbye to your overtime and double time and a half. I'll be hitting grounders to the high school baseball team for $5k extra a summer, thank you very much.

    It's presumptions to assume that the same skill set to banking applies to teaching and manual labor. Just because you can sell junk bonds don't mean you can connect and educate children. Nor does it imply that you would be capable of doing manual labor for shitty pay. Not to mention if the author would to take on such low paying professions I'm sure he would do all of the overtime off the clock as he implies.

    So now that we're going to be making $85k a year without upside, Joe Mainstreet is going to have his revenge, right? Wrong! Guess what: we're going to stop buying the new 80k car, we aren't going to leave the 35 percent tip at our business dinners anymore. No more free rides on our backs. We're going to landscape our own back yards, wash our cars with a garden hose in our driveways. Our money was your money. You spent it. When our money dries up, so does yours.

    No one is getting a free ride of a bankers back. If a banker is hiring a service provider they are working hard for their money and usually at a low wage. Seeing as though outrageous bonus levels are a relatively new thing, and that both wall street and main street have been doing just fine for the past several decades, I'm pretty sure that the well being of the non finance professionals, whether white or blue collar will be just fine.

    The difference is, you lived off of it, we rejoiced in it. The Obama administration and the Democratic National Committee might get their way and knock us off the top of the pyramid, but it's really going to hurt like hell for them when our fat a**es land directly on the middle class of America and knock them to the bottom.

    Again presumptuously implying that he will knock the middle class down a level. What does that even mean. The tens of thousands of traders are going displace the tens of millions of middle class workers who will just become magically poor.

    We aren't dinosaurs. We are smarter and more vicious than that, and we are going to survive. The question is, now that Obama & his administration are making Joe Mainstreet our food supply...will he? and will they?

    Yes, you are so intelligent. Smart enough to come up with a nonsensical rant that reeks of douche bag yet does not provide any factual support and merely offers outrageous assumptions. I find it so disgusting how some people in finance are so pathetically narcissistic. Finance isn't the best of the best. That would be engineers, doctors, innovators, entrepreneurs or those that follow their true passions regardless of the pay. Not hating on finance, as I'm in it, rather pointing out that some people in finance think they are god's gift to civilization when they are nothing of the sort.

    Stop drinking our own Koolaid.

  • In reply to soitwouldseem
    Car Ramrod's picture

    soitwouldseem:
    Here is my perspective as a recent graduate that does not want to be a banker.

    Just because you are a good banker does not mean that you would be a good engineer, a good teacher, a good small business owner, etc. I would bet money that being engineer (one that designs projects) is a little more difficult then being a banker. Engineers need to have an understanding of mathematics, physics, chemistry, etc that not all bankers could master. No offense, but finance is a blow off major, and I would bet that your entry level positions at banks are basically glorified but well compensated bitches.

    Owning a small business is also very difficult. When you start, you have to be willing to work very hard (as hard as any banker), for almost nothing, and what your working at in usually manual and not fun. And If I had to be a high school teacher for the rest of my life, I would use the sepku knife, because contrary to popular opinion teachers work hard and are constantly shit upon by a bunch of immature dbags.

    To those of you who think that you are going to be able to hop on to law. First take the LSAT its harder than the gmat. Then to make all that money that you are having wet dreams about realize that you must first get into a top 14 law school, and then you have to be in the top 15% of your class.

    Lets not pretend that just because you are a banker, you can do anything else. If I was going to list the ten most difficult jobs-banker would not be one of them.

    All this crap about banking being the foundation of the economy, and that we would go back to the dark ages without banking is retarded. You could have all the banking you wanted, but if you didnt have innovators like Tesla and Edison etc, a legal code that has evolved through the centuries, we would not be very far away from the dark ages. The economy needs banks to supply loans to individuals and businesses. That is all. The machine will go on without the tens of thousands of bankers-it wont run as smoothly, and it might suck for quite a while, but dont pretend what bankers do is essential.

    Finally, for the record, everytime someone says that this reminds them of Rand and Gault they admit that they are retarded.

    Some random thoughts:

    "Owning a small business is difficult."

    Two points:
    1) If that business succeeds, you make for more money than banker. You may not get paid as much at the initial stages, but I guarantee that you will far surpass any banker if you and your idea are solid. 2) Then don't own a small business. If something is hard and doesn't pay well, logic would tell you not to follow that path. If you can afford and have the intelligence to open your own company, then you should have other options should you choose to exercise them. Just because something is hard, doesn't mean you should get paid a lot for it. Otherwise, construction workers and landscapers would dominate the world. Also, realize the concept of expected value.

    Being an engineer may be harder than a banker. My best friend is an engineer, and he absolutely blows me away his mathematical knowledge. However, you could never put him in front of a client (I know, analyst's rarely are anyway). He knows numbers. He doesn't know people. In the end, CFOs don't want to talk to people that aren't polished. It's a sad truth. I'm far from polished, but I can game face it when needed.

    Lawyers are geniuses and far too smart for banking...you're right. But how much value do those lawyers create? It's a legitimate question, as they may create some value with a tightly written PSA or ProSupp, but they do not originate anything. They are reactionary to banking transactions. Why would you pay someone who essentially supports bankers more than bankers? Shall we pay your assistant more than you? They chose that profession knowing exactly what it entailed.

    The only two people I know that are going into teaching are the two biggest idiots I know. You don't realize just how incompetent your teachers were in school until you know the people that become teachers later in life.

    Finance is a blow-off major relative to engineering. You're right. I have no argument. However, please also make fun of all the teachers with education degrees, journalists with communication degrees, and advertisers with advertising degrees. With the exception of a hard science or math, there aren't that many "rocket science" majors.

    If you are going to call someone retarded for referring to "Gault," then please spell it correctly. Thank you.

  • In reply to ke18sb
    Car Ramrod's picture

    ke18sb:
    @moneyneversleeps

    Your point brings up an interesting question, if your premise is in fact correct, that the success of main st is dependent on the success of wall st (which I disagree with to a degree), doesn't that mean that the industry itself is too powerful, or in other words too big to fail. Isn't that part of the very root of the argument for financial reform. Why should one industry, in this case finance, have such a large sphere of influence that if it fails everyone fails as well.

    In finance speak, you're implying that the American economy is a very unbalanced portfolio. Thus we need to reallocate our investments (industries) to mitigate our risk. We need to practice risk management and proper portfolio allocation, tenants of intelligent finance, to ensure the lasting success of the American economy. Whether you realize it or not, you're arguing for financial reform.

    Certainly, finance is too powerful because main street depends upon it. Shall we also determine that the energy industry is too powerful because it provides the fuel for our power plants, cars, and planes? Shall we ban the utilities industry because it is too powerful (get it?) and we all depend upon it? Shall we break up the healthcare industry because we all need healthcare?

    Finance and energy are perhaps the two industries most relevant to the entire economic system. There is no possible way to "reform" it such that this is not the case. You may shift some things around so that things change, but finance will unfortunately (I'm a banker) never be shifted to a point where it cannot cause systemic issues. It is at the root of all productive activity, and this will not change.

  • ke18sb's picture

    @Car

    Agreed that you can't breakup finance just like you wouldn't break up energy or health care. However, both of those industries are highly regulated. So its not an apples to apples comparison in the current state. The goal of financial reform would be to mitigate said systemic issues is all. While it will not guarantee there will be no future financial meltdowns it will ideally strengthen the system.

  • mxc's picture

    It must be said that, except for true geniuses, the most intelligent and ambitious men usually go into consulting or finance. It was certainly the case at my school and must hold true for other targets.

    Look at the young talent on a trading floor: they all have the best credentials. In the UK, it's all Oxbridge or Ecole Polytechnique. It is absolutely ridiculous to contend that those guys could not be teachers. I'm not saying they would be great teachers. I'm saying they could get the qualification. Same applies to lawyers, doctors, you name it.

    So many youngsters want to be bankers or consultants because those industries pay well and ensure that you will be someone who matters 20 years down the line. When being a teacher will offer the same perks, they will become teachers, trust me.

    The question is thus, "why does finance pay so well / is such a good career?"
    Finance has an important role in the economy, as I said capital allocation and wealth transfer. The comparison with energy is to the point. At the same time, the markets suffer from asymmetry and financiers probably have an information rent. I doubt it is possible to seriously deal with that. As for excessive risk taking, it's easier to spot ex-post, isn't it? Raising capital requirements will limit the impact of crises but will not eliminate them.

    Finance is a good career because it is a strong signal of one's intelligence and understanding of business. Even though legions of undergrads would work in banking for $20.000/y, they're the stupid ones the banks refuse to employ. I am the first one to admit that banking is not rocket science, but what is, seriously? Those who say that it's easy to be a banker are not mistaken - but to think that banking is "easier" one must never have worked. Consulting is easy too. Why the fuck do they hire top talent then? Because even though the day-to-day job is easy, intelligence still is an advantage, be it through enhanced learning capacities (and you learn a shitload) or during the occasional mind-boggling crunch. You really must be a retard to think that the average teacher would be as valuable to a bank as the people they tend to employ now.

    Now the idea of the original letter was that ambitious types won't go away and, if banking becomes a dull career, they will pursue other opportunities - successfully.

    soitwouldseem, feel free to post your ten most difficult jobs so I can laugh at you. Difficulty is irrelevant. You're paid according to your productivity.

  • moneyneversleeps2's picture

    @ke18sb - Main St and Wall St do go hand in hand. And politicians know that otherwise they would have clamped down when pure dogshit derivatives first made their rounds. The subprime mortgage crisis began with Main St having champagne taste off ginger ale pockets and using toxic credit to fund their need to impress people they don't even know with homes/cars/investments they cannot afford and didn't take the time to read the fine print. Wall Street may have been the one who packaged those loans and ultimately ended up getting their asses handed to them but the concept of lying about your income to get a house you cannot afford began on Main Street.
    Also, any financial advisor with a brain will tell you NOT to use more than 30% of your assets to play the markets since you can win big and lose big. Once again Main St got ahead of itself and didn't want the traditional 3-6% ROI from CDs and MM accounts, they wanted 40% gains every year and were willing to risk 50%+ of their net worth to get that. Wall Street and Main Street are equally greedy. The difference is for years Wall Street profited off Main Street's greed.
    The Government and general public will always go after those who profit the most off a bad situation when it takes demand to fuel supply. ie Drug dealers getting harscher sentences than drug users. Tobacco industry getting huge fines instead of smokers, Main St demanding toxic loans so they can "act as if" with giant mansions and 100% return portfolios and Wall St supplying that demand....until it exploded.
    That's my two cents on the situation. Main St and Wall St are equally guilty. So instead of wanting bankers' heads on a stick I hope Obama, with the help of people whose IQ isn't the same number as their shoe size, can come up with a solution that doesn't leave top-skilled bankers unemployed otherwise they will affect the job market.

  • In reply to ke18sb
    Batrick Pateman's picture

    ke18sb:
    So here it goes then. Why I think this is a pathetic ramblings of an uneducated douche bag.

    We are Wall Street. It's our job to make money....Just like gambling, its not a problem until you lose...well now the market crapped out....well here we are

    The first two paragraphs make finance sound unsophisticated. Its almost as if the writer is conceding all it was is a giant bet that lost. This makes finance sound simplistic while making the traders that lost come off as unintelligent gamblers that ran out of luck. He is implying that traders were just playing a game and lost and people should stop whining about it. Its asinine for 2 reasons. One, finance is not that trivial. Two, if it is, then your'e admitting that traders aren't a cut above the rest, rather people that was given the keys to a car that they didn't know how to drive.

    What's going to happen when we can't find jobs on the Street anymore? Guess what: We're going to take yours. We get up at 5am & work till 10pm or later. We're used to not getting up to pee when we have a position. We don't take an hour or more for a lunch break. We don't demand a union. We don't retire at 50 with a pension. We eat what we kill, and when the only thing left to eat is on your dinner plates, we'll eat that.

    Yes, certainty you are going to apply your work ethic to a non-financially lucrative field. As if its your ethos driving you to work so hard is not the money. Laughable.

    For years teachers and other unionized labor have had us fooled. We were too busy working to notice. Do you really think that we are incapable of teaching 3rd graders and doing landscaping? We're going to take your cushy jobs with tenure and 4 months off a year and whine just like you that we are so-o-o-o underpaid for building the youth of America. Say goodbye to your overtime and double time and a half. I'll be hitting grounders to the high school baseball team for $5k extra a summer, thank you very much.

    It's presumptions to assume that the same skill set to banking applies to teaching and manual labor. Just because you can sell junk bonds don't mean you can connect and educate children. Nor does it imply that you would be capable of doing manual labor for shitty pay. Not to mention if the author would to take on such low paying professions I'm sure he would do all of the overtime off the clock as he implies.

    So now that we're going to be making $85k a year without upside, Joe Mainstreet is going to have his revenge, right? Wrong! Guess what: we're going to stop buying the new 80k car, we aren't going to leave the 35 percent tip at our business dinners anymore. No more free rides on our backs. We're going to landscape our own back yards, wash our cars with a garden hose in our driveways. Our money was your money. You spent it. When our money dries up, so does yours.

    No one is getting a free ride of a bankers back. If a banker is hiring a service provider they are working hard for their money and usually at a low wage. Seeing as though outrageous bonus levels are a relatively new thing, and that both wall street and main street have been doing just fine for the past several decades, I'm pretty sure that the well being of the non finance professionals, whether white or blue collar will be just fine.

    The difference is, you lived off of it, we rejoiced in it. The Obama administration and the Democratic National Committee might get their way and knock us off the top of the pyramid, but it's really going to hurt like hell for them when our fat a**es land directly on the middle class of America and knock them to the bottom.

    Again presumptuously implying that he will knock the middle class down a level. What does that even mean. The tens of thousands of traders are going displace the tens of millions of middle class workers who will just become magically poor.

    We aren't dinosaurs. We are smarter and more vicious than that, and we are going to survive. The question is, now that Obama & his administration are making Joe Mainstreet our food supply...will he? and will they?

    Yes, you are so intelligent. Smart enough to come up with a nonsensical rant that reeks of douche bag yet does not provide any factual support and merely offers outrageous assumptions. I find it so disgusting how some people in finance are so pathetically narcissistic. Finance isn't the best of the best. That would be engineers, doctors, innovators, entrepreneurs or those that follow their true passions regardless of the pay. Not hating on finance, as I'm in it, rather pointing out that some people in finance think they are god's gift to civilization when they are nothing of the sort.

    Stop drinking our own Koolaid.

    good points.
    I liked it and im not a prospective monkey. I liked it because its amusing, a little juvenile and because im personnally sick of moron ppl asking me if i feel responsible for what happened., as if we were all responsible.
    If the populus wants to simplify us to such an extent as crooks and gamblers, then why not respond by an eqully juvenile rant...?

  • In reply to ke18sb
    Batrick Pateman's picture

    ke18sb:
    So here it goes then. Why I think this is a pathetic ramblings of an uneducated douche bag.

    We are Wall Street. It's our job to make money....Just like gambling, its not a problem until you lose...well now the market crapped out....well here we are

    The first two paragraphs make finance sound unsophisticated. Its almost as if the writer is conceding all it was is a giant bet that lost. This makes finance sound simplistic while making the traders that lost come off as unintelligent gamblers that ran out of luck. He is implying that traders were just playing a game and lost and people should stop whining about it. Its asinine for 2 reasons. One, finance is not that trivial. Two, if it is, then your'e admitting that traders aren't a cut above the rest, rather people that was given the keys to a car that they didn't know how to drive.

    What's going to happen when we can't find jobs on the Street anymore? Guess what: We're going to take yours. We get up at 5am & work till 10pm or later. We're used to not getting up to pee when we have a position. We don't take an hour or more for a lunch break. We don't demand a union. We don't retire at 50 with a pension. We eat what we kill, and when the only thing left to eat is on your dinner plates, we'll eat that.

    Yes, certainty you are going to apply your work ethic to a non-financially lucrative field. As if its your ethos driving you to work so hard is not the money. Laughable.

    For years teachers and other unionized labor have had us fooled. We were too busy working to notice. Do you really think that we are incapable of teaching 3rd graders and doing landscaping? We're going to take your cushy jobs with tenure and 4 months off a year and whine just like you that we are so-o-o-o underpaid for building the youth of America. Say goodbye to your overtime and double time and a half. I'll be hitting grounders to the high school baseball team for $5k extra a summer, thank you very much.

    It's presumptions to assume that the same skill set to banking applies to teaching and manual labor. Just because you can sell junk bonds don't mean you can connect and educate children. Nor does it imply that you would be capable of doing manual labor for shitty pay. Not to mention if the author would to take on such low paying professions I'm sure he would do all of the overtime off the clock as he implies.

    So now that we're going to be making $85k a year without upside, Joe Mainstreet is going to have his revenge, right? Wrong! Guess what: we're going to stop buying the new 80k car, we aren't going to leave the 35 percent tip at our business dinners anymore. No more free rides on our backs. We're going to landscape our own back yards, wash our cars with a garden hose in our driveways. Our money was your money. You spent it. When our money dries up, so does yours.

    No one is getting a free ride of a bankers back. If a banker is hiring a service provider they are working hard for their money and usually at a low wage. Seeing as though outrageous bonus levels are a relatively new thing, and that both wall street and main street have been doing just fine for the past several decades, I'm pretty sure that the well being of the non finance professionals, whether white or blue collar will be just fine.

    The difference is, you lived off of it, we rejoiced in it. The Obama administration and the Democratic National Committee might get their way and knock us off the top of the pyramid, but it's really going to hurt like hell for them when our fat a**es land directly on the middle class of America and knock them to the bottom.

    Again presumptuously implying that he will knock the middle class down a level. What does that even mean. The tens of thousands of traders are going displace the tens of millions of middle class workers who will just become magically poor.

    We aren't dinosaurs. We are smarter and more vicious than that, and we are going to survive. The question is, now that Obama & his administration are making Joe Mainstreet our food supply...will he? and will they?

    Yes, you are so intelligent. Smart enough to come up with a nonsensical rant that reeks of douche bag yet does not provide any factual support and merely offers outrageous assumptions. I find it so disgusting how some people in finance are so pathetically narcissistic. Finance isn't the best of the best. That would be engineers, doctors, innovators, entrepreneurs or those that follow their true passions regardless of the pay. Not hating on finance, as I'm in it, rather pointing out that some people in finance think they are god's gift to civilization when they are nothing of the sort.

    Stop drinking our own Koolaid.

    good points.
    I liked it and im not a prospective monkey. I liked it because its amusing, a little juvenile and because im personnally sick of moron ppl asking me if i feel responsible for what happened., as if we were all responsible.
    If the populus wants to simplify us to such an extent as crooks and gamblers, then why not respond by an eqully juvenile rant...?

  • moneyneversleeps2's picture

    ^^^^^^^ Don't complain about people asking you about the crisis. The minute I tell people I'm a banker with a degree in Econ, they think I'm some Suze Orman and start asking me about Fico scores and credit cards lol. Once I explain to them that Economics nor Banking has anything to do with Suze Orman, they proceed to ask me about Bernie Madoff.

  • In reply to moneyneversleeps2
    Batrick Pateman's picture

    moneyneversleeps2:
    ^^^^^^^ Don't complain about people asking you about the crisis. The minute I tell people I'm a banker with a degree in Econ, they think I'm some Suze Orman and start asking me about Fico scores and credit cards lol. Once I explain to them that Economics nor Banking has anything to do with Suze Orman, they proceed to ask me about Bernie Madoff.

    LOL~~~!!!!!

  • Djalminha's picture

    I can't believe someone has made the claim that corporate lawyers (a) are smarter than financiers and (b) do a more valuable job. Big law is an extension of the back office and is populated by soulless, one track minded dullards with great memories and work ethics and absolutely zero intellectual flair.

    As for the letter itself it is quite clearly tongue in cheek and I can't see why anyone is getting their knickers in a twist over it. The fact is that the general public were more than happy to lap up debt fuelled growth and we are now suffering for it. Do bankers share culpability? Of course. Can a vibrant economy exist without a large and complex financial sector? Not on your life.

  • In reply to Djalminha
    TheKing's picture

    To unlock this content for free, please login / register below.

    Connecting helps us build a vibrant community. We'll never share your info without your permission. Sign up with email or if you are already a member, login here Bonus: Also get 6 free financial modeling lessons for free ($200+ value) when you register!
  • onedaygekko's picture

    I know nothing. please share knowledge

  • IronkidMS's picture
  • Status_Quo's picture

    http://ayainsight.co/ Curating the best advice and making it actionable.

  • In reply to WSOHelper
    happypantsmcgee's picture

    If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses - Henry Ford

  • Serendipity's picture
  • trazer985's picture
  • In reply to trazer985
    MMBinNC's picture

    Reality hits you hard, bro...

Pages