Robert Rubin, etc. etc.

The New York Times did a nice piece on campaign contributions per industry: Wall St. contributed enormous sums of money to Democratic campaigns (on par with, and in some cases higher, than Republicans)

I'm a "yankee" conservative: fiscally conservative, but socially extremely liberal.

I doubt many of the top MDs, CFOs, VPs, and CEOs believe in creationism and all the other non-sense evangelical value issues the modern Republican party espouses--Don't drink the Kool-Aid.

 

As others have said, Hillary has raised more money from Wall Street than the Republicans.  I think there's somewhat of a "robber barron" feeling among those on Wall Street so they ar more inclined to donate to Democrats.

In reality, most working bankers I know are conservative and pissed that the Democrats appear to be winning in 2008 thus far.

Personally, I'm fiscally conservative and socially liberal.  So with Ron Paul gone, I don't know what to do. :)

 
dosk17:

As others have said, Hillary has raised more money from Wall Street than the Republicans.

Reading this from outside USA, these comments are quite amusing, you guys seem to imply Democrats = left-wing, Republicans = right. The Democrats are more right-wing than the mainstream right-wing party in most other developed nations. Most banking grads I know are pretty right-wing, incredibly greedy and selfish, all they care about is their bonus and how to avoid paying tax on it. At the top end, there's plenty of left-leaning successful bankers - as said when you're a multi-millionaire a few mill tax this way or that is irrelevant. However, a lot of my friends who are corporate attorneys / solicitors at top international firms are very liberal / socialist / left-wing. I find them at times very hypocritical, passionately arguing about social justice and redistribution of wealth, whilst their day-job involves reducing tax burdens of multinationals etc.
 

On average, the bankers I've met tend to be more libertarian, which means small government both out of your pocket book and out of your bedroom, so to say. Unfortunately, each party tends to violate those values on one side. A lot of super rich bankers tend to go Democrat, probably because they have so much money that a few points of tax rate doesn't affect their ability to buy that expensive car or house, nor are they running businesses that suffer from the Democrat's tendency to favor consumer over corporate rights. Thus they are less concerned with "tax the rich" Dems and more concerned with "Christian Republic of America" Republicans.

 

Warren Buffett contributes to the Democratic party.

To touch on what some others have said above regarding most of Wall Street's contributions going to the democrats, I think you are seeing is the flow of cash to the left more as industry protection than personal views perhaps.  There is no doubt there are democratic bankers (ie Buffett, Blankfein) but I think most people see Election '08 ending in a democratic victory due to dissatisfaction with the Bush administration.  Everyone knows Democrats tend to be in favor of higher taxes which means they are generally against Wall Street, big oil, and big pharma.  Perhaps seeing a Clinton or Obama victory as inevitable, these industries are donating big to the campaigns so they can have a say when said candidate goes into office.  This is just a big lobby.

 

I myself am fiscally conservative and socially liberal. I think both parties suck, but I can't see how most bankers would support the republicans. Quite frankly, a lot of the anti-corporate stuff from politicians is just rhetoric.  Very little need to worry on the part of corporations either way. However, republican policies (education, science,religion) tend not to be good for the general welfare.

 

I don't think it really matters. Most people, including myself, keep our politics to ourselves so as not to alienate friends or higher-ups. Me and my ideological counterpart, Ann Coulter, may differ on this but I have many very very liberal friends both inside and outside the banking would. For example my uncle works at Lehman Brothers and is one of the most liberal people I know . Its really funny, he looks like and is often mistaken for George W. Bush (and hates GWB).

Reality hits you hard, bro...
 

As dosk said, "In reality, most working bankers I know are conservative and pissed that the Democrats appear to be winning in 2008 thus far."  I feel that this will be the case with most analysts/associates.  Once you're wealthy, it is easy to be a dem and to give tons of money to the democratic campaigns (for reasons lightsout mentioned).  For those aspiring for wealth, it seems to me most would have a reason (at least financially) to lean toward the right.

Do any other current bankers echo what dosk said?

 

But seriously, can the Republican party really be represented by creationists and religious wingnuts? I'm not American, but to me it seems that the Republican Party has simply been hijacked by Christian fundamentalists (theocrats?) in recent years. Hopefully it's just a temporary phenomenon.

When I think of the Republican Party, I still think of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, phrases like "Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem." If only they would get back to the real Republican platform...

 

Barclays are a piece of shit. They had your transcript, yet still asked you to fly in to say your major is not quantitative enough?! I feel bad for you man.

I've seen pol sci majors get good gigs before, and from less prestigious universities than McGill. Not sure what the issue was to be honest. Keep at it, is what I can say.

Good luck.

 

It's funny they should say that because in banking you don't need the quantitative rigor! and you're right, they hire philosophy majors.

 

The person who interviewed you is probably not the person who decided to fly you in for the interview. You met the criteria for the first person, but not that of the interviewer. Tough break but this isn't really uncommon.

CompBanker’s Career Guidance Services: https://www.rossettiadvisors.com/
 

Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

 
obscenity:
Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

I was an econ major and avoided econometrics and I ended up in IB. That never came up in any interview in my life. So no, you are in no position to say that especially since IB has no overlap with econometrics.

 
LeveragedFiend:
obscenity:
Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

I was an econ major and avoided econometrics and I ended up in IB. That never came up in any interview in my life. So no, you are in no position to say that especially since IB has no overlap with econometrics.

It's not so much that econometrics is a practical skill, but rather that someone would intentionally avoid the most quantitative class that would normally be expected of someone in their major. If he took a bunch of math electives to further his economic ability but decided that econometrics didn't have any direct application to his job I would overlook that, but his post makes it sound like that's not the case. I'm of the old school of thought that "creative thinking" and "emotional intelligence" are just buzzwords for "can't do math".
 
obscenity:
LeveragedFiend:
obscenity:
Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

I was an econ major and avoided econometrics and I ended up in IB. That never came up in any interview in my life. So no, you are in no position to say that especially since IB has no overlap with econometrics.

It's not so much that econometrics is a practical skill, but rather that someone would intentionally avoid the most quantitative class that would normally be expected of someone in their major. If he took a bunch of math electives to further his economic ability but decided that econometrics didn't have any direct application to his job I would overlook that, but his post makes it sound like that's not the case. I'm of the old school of thought that "creative thinking" and "emotional intelligence" are just buzzwords for "can't do math".

this is what I was thinking, from initial post the OP comes across as long haired politics douche bag that can barely count.

seems like the VP saw this the same way.

 
obscenity:
LeveragedFiend:
obscenity:
Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

I was an econ major and avoided econometrics and I ended up in IB. That never came up in any interview in my life. So no, you are in no position to say that especially since IB has no overlap with econometrics.

It's not so much that econometrics is a practical skill, but rather that someone would intentionally avoid the most quantitative class that would normally be expected of someone in their major. If he took a bunch of math electives to further his economic ability but decided that econometrics didn't have any direct application to his job I would overlook that, but his post makes it sound like that's not the case. I'm of the old school of thought that "creative thinking" and "emotional intelligence" are just buzzwords for "can't do math".

To be brutally honest, I avoided the honours economics courses (which includes econometrics, etc) like hell to have a higher GPA and to not be surrounded by socially awkward, obnoxious "I am going to graduate cum laude, and will be carried on a throne into LSE, MIT or Harvard economics or quantitative finance masters / PhD, and then rule the world" (When talking to them, I wanted to cum laude in their face! ) Either way, before I digress (well, I already have), I still made it seem like the course was not interesting to me instead of "challenging." At this point, I just want to find out what my options are, because I am screwed in a way, because I can't do masters in quantitative finance or economics (major program doesn't allow that), and if I don't get into IB, I'll have to work in some crappy small financial company for 2 years or so, and then go for MBA, and have another go at it. frustration

 
Best Response
HustlingHard:
obscenity:
LeveragedFiend:
obscenity:
Your resume is much better than mine and I'm really in no position to say anything, but I would be very wary of hiring an econ major who avoided econometrics for any position, not just IB.

I was an econ major and avoided econometrics and I ended up in IB. That never came up in any interview in my life. So no, you are in no position to say that especially since IB has no overlap with econometrics.

It's not so much that econometrics is a practical skill, but rather that someone would intentionally avoid the most quantitative class that would normally be expected of someone in their major. If he took a bunch of math electives to further his economic ability but decided that econometrics didn't have any direct application to his job I would overlook that, but his post makes it sound like that's not the case. I'm of the old school of thought that "creative thinking" and "emotional intelligence" are just buzzwords for "can't do math".

To be brutally honest, I avoided the honours economics courses (which includes econometrics, etc) like hell to have a higher GPA and to not be surrounded by socially awkward, obnoxious "I am going to graduate cum laude, and will be carried on a throne into LSE, MIT or Harvard economics or quantitative finance masters / PhD, and then rule the world" (When talking to them, I wanted to cum laude in their face! ) Either way, before I digress (well, I already have), I still made it seem like the course was not interesting to me instead of "challenging." At this point, I just want to find out what my options are, because I am screwed in a way, because I can't do masters in quantitative finance or economics (major program doesn't allow that), and if I don't get into IB, I'll have to work in some crappy small financial company for 2 years or so, and then go for MBA, and have another go at it. frustration

There's absolutely no reason you need to take econometrics. It's boring as all hell and utterly useless for investment banking. Also, creative thinking may not be the dominant skill at the entry level, but even a monkey can learn technical skills. At some point in your career in finance, you're going to have to think creatively about business' problems. Whether or not you've taken econometrics is irrelevant. I majored in econ and never bothered with econometrics b/c you don't get that many chances to take classes; I wasn't wasting a spot on something I have no interest in. And I ended up in banking anyway, so not having econometrics on my transcript never hurt me whatsoever. Lots of history majors get banking jobs. Let's be real.

Honestly, there is a legitimate debate about whether the economics profession's shift to intense mathematical models has even enhanced our understanding. I don't think Adam Smith ever took econometrics, but I think he knew a hell of a lot more about how an economy works than some of the douchers coming out of MIT these days.

 

Yes, it is frustrating. And here is the thing. I have friends who are math majors, and they minored in econ, and they have way lower GPAs than me (I'm talking 3.2 or lower). And they are working at BB! As happy as I am for them (because they really are good friends of mine), I am just pissed at my adviser who told me that econ major and poly sci with a high GPA will be just fine for IB. And of course I am raging that I had to fly in because they were too lazy to read my transcript.

 
HustlingHard:
Yes, it is frustrating. And here is the thing. I have friends who are math majors, and they minored in econ, and they have way lower GPAs than me (I'm talking 3.2 or lower). And they are working at BB! As happy as I am for them (because they really are good friends of mine), I am just pissed at my adviser who told me that econ major and poly sci with a high GPA will be just fine for IB. And of course I am raging that I had to fly in because they were too lazy to read my transcript.
It is good enough. If anything wasn't enough, it was that you only went to 2 interviews.
 

What's nice about IBD and S&T recruiting in the US is that there is far less emphasis on what your major is - so you can come from some arts or science background, and still get the job - so long as you pass their fit/culture and technicals process. Hence, you're not faulted for decisions you made in high school (who knows for certain what they want to do in high school anyway?)

But in Canada, if you want to be in IBD and S&T, 99% of the time, interviewees are from some commerce background (and also engineering/math for S&T). If the Barclays guy is used to interviewing Ivey/Queens/McGill commerce students, maybe he's got some bias for Canadian students needing to fit a certain mold.

I think you were just unlucky like CompBanker said, but just thought I provide another possibility.

Shouldn't they pay for your flight/accommodations though?

 

You are putting too much emphasis on your major. I'm sure that wasn't the whole issue. Banks don't care what major you are if you seem like a good fit. You didn't seem to be a good fit so they brushed you off with that excuse, but that I think your major is a non issue.

Do what you want not what you can!
 

My 2 cents man, not to say that i'm right or wrong just my two cents man because i come from a very similar boat as you...

The jobs just aren't there right now so there mind set is hire super smart geeks. Get cracking on the CFA in my opinion

The biggest aspect of IB is modelling, if you could of displayed to them, via maybe models you've done in the past you would of spiked a bit more interest from them and got them to shut up about being more "quant"

sorry to hear that man, jus keep pluggin away

 
wallstreetballa:
My 2 cents man, not to say that i'm right or wrong just my two cents man because i come from a very similar boat as you...

The jobs just aren't there right now so there mind set is hire super smart geeks. Get cracking on the CFA in my opinion

The biggest aspect of IB is modelling, if you could of displayed to them, via maybe models you've done in the past you would of spiked a bit more interest from them and got them to shut up about being more "quant"

sorry to hear that man, jus keep pluggin away

That's what I thought too. I think at this point they are over-flooded with MIT geniuses who also have social skills and good GPAs, and I guess they just pick from the top of the pile. I'll go get cracking on CFA and learn DCF ASAP for sure.

 

What a load of horse shit. They were a bunch of dicks. With that said, your post above makes me think that you are also at fault, for not challenging yourself in school by avoiding those certain courses.

Who gives a fuck about those socially awkward kids? Why do you hate them anyway? Who gave you the right to judge them and say they are socially awkward, who the fuck are you? Because they want to be successful and intelligent? Suck it up and stop bitching, no one is asking you to be best friends with them.

So I feel both, sorry for you and like you deserved it, for being such a popular princess that's too good for the nerds.

Under my tutelage, you will grow from boys to men. From men into gladiators. And from gladiators into SWANSONS.
 

Bud, I understand your frustration, but it was just your first two interviews. You will get into IB. It may not be JPM or Barcap, but you'll get in. Just keep networking.

Let's be honest, a Econ/poli sci degree is probably one of the better BA degrees, but from a Canadian School, it does come off kinda wishy-washy. Make sure you NAIL all the techs and show a strong interest in Finance, because there really isn't any reason for you not to be in a commerce program if you truly want to do banking.

You seem like a fairly normal, social guy, and your stats are MUCH more impressive than mine, from a way better school, and somehow I did it. Just keep moving forward and try not to dwell on the past. Use it as MOTIVATION.

 

As far as people giving the OP shit for not taking harder courses... I've read some advice on this site where people have recommended not to take unnecessary (harder) courses to maintain a high gpa to break into IB.

If your dreams don't scare you, then they are not big enough. "There are two types of people in this world: People who say they pee in the shower, and dirty fucking liars."-Louis C.K.
 
scottj19x89:
As far as people giving the OP shit for not taking harder courses... I've read some advice on this site where people have recommended not to take unnecessary (harder) courses to maintain a high gpa to break into IB.

I really am starting to question this advice now A LOT. Maybe I should've at least minored in math or something, just not to come off as a liberal arts kid. It is upsetting though, because a bunch of kids with worse stats in more quantitative majors are getting in, so I feel like I've listened to the wrong advice (I don't mean on WSO, but from others at university and from my research on the industry in general). I am starting to think that maybe your hard courses signal "balls" to employer? Like, a fact that you were willing to take a chance with your GPA and learn something hard. I guess they interviewed someone with similar stats, and he stood out in a special way, and they wanted to see the same with me. I do admit "economic crises" and "international relations" don't sound like very intense courses.

 

Don't listen to these idiots... you don't need calc for shit in IB. At the end of the day it's just signalling theory

You come from a non-core, Canadian school and you need to show them that you're on top of your shit. If you're an econ / poli sci major and haven't taken many math or stats classes, that's an automatic ding. Either that, or the guy just straight up didn't like you and was looking for a reason to toss you out. Sorry, but that's the way the world works.

You need to adjust your resume accordingly and keep your head up

Good luck

 
Solidarity:
Don't listen to these idiots... you don't need calc for shit in IB. At the end of the day it's just signalling theory

You come from a non-core, Canadian school and you need to show them that you're on top of your shit. If you're an econ / poli sci major and haven't taken many math or stats classes, that's an automatic ding. Either that, or the guy just straight up didn't like you and was looking for a reason to toss you out. Sorry, but that's the way the world works.

You need to adjust your resume accordingly and keep your head up

Good luck

This one.

Under my tutelage, you will grow from boys to men. From men into gladiators. And from gladiators into SWANSONS.
 
Solidarity:
Don't listen to these idiots... you don't need calc for shit in IB. At the end of the day it's just signalling theory

You come from a non-core, Canadian school and you need to show them that you're on top of your shit. If you're an econ / poli sci major and haven't taken many math or stats classes, that's an automatic ding. Either that, or the guy just straight up didn't like you and was looking for a reason to toss you out. Sorry, but that's the way the world works.

You need to adjust your resume accordingly and keep your head up

Good luck

so he doesn't need calc for shit, but he got dinged because he hasn't taken any math or stats classes?

that's not contradictory at all...

 

To me, it sounds like they probably had equal or better candidates that didn't require a work visa. It sucks that it works out that way, but I'm sure if you had opportunities in NYC you could also apply in Toronto with ease.

 
zenaku:
To me, it sounds like they probably had equal or better candidates that didn't require a work visa. It sucks that it works out that way, but I'm sure if you had opportunities in NYC you could also apply in Toronto with ease.

After cogitating about the op's dilemma, this post tells all. Op, even though Mcgill is a good school, you still could have made your application more competitive. After all, you are competing with American students, from schools just as good as yours and better, for American jobs.

Good luck on the job search!

 
jack_donaghy:
Is your economics degree a bachelor of arts or science? If it's an arts degree, your Econ degree is worthless in business.

That's not the problem, and there's no difference between an BA and BS in Econ. There are kids from Harvard with AB (Bachelor of Arts) in sociology working on the street.

 

I mean I will keep hustling, but I just hope that this whole "your economics was too artsy" thing doesn't follow me around to my next interviews (if I get them).