My liberal sister keeps holding it over me that “investment banks are evil.” Do you guys have any good counter arguments i can use?

Casually mention that Hitler was right and then mention later in an unrelated conversation that Jews control the world's banks.

honestly IB isn't as bad compared to PE or HF, if you are in M&A you are just helping people sell their companies. If you explain it to her I bet she'll understand. She probably dislikes it mainly because it's high finance and most people (not all) can be a little insufferable.

are you retarded

Good counter is how I-Banks help healthcare companies raise capital to make their medicines/treatments/etc more accessible

Tell her to fuck off

Bro why u getting bullied by ur sister. Show her ur paycheck and she’ll shut up real quick

Does she or you know what investment banks do? It’s actually a really needed service. Yeah, bankers are greedy and sales-like, but that’s the type of person who does the job, not the service itself. It’s like being a used car salesman—yeah used car salesmen have a bad rep, but someone needs to sell used cars to people lol. Generally, investment banks are basically fundraisers for companies. They go out to people and say, “hey give this company money by buying equity, giving them a loan, or buy the company flat out, so you can grow the company.” This is pretty freaking important. Everything from companies that create healthcare products, to new inventions, to new drugs, to educational start-ups, all need money in order to grow and add value to the world. Without banks, it would be very hard for companies to raise money or exchange ownership which would prevent new companies from growing. Hopefully she can agree new companies are important, so therefore banks are important.

Ultimately, she might just be too dumb to understand why that is important and think that all companies that exist are evil/ capitalism bad. In that case, ask her if she has ever dealt with a bureaucracy or a political committee of some sort. Communism/ socialism ultimately is just corruption because at the end of the day, you are saying someone (the government) gets to decide how goods and services and wealth is distributed, which is a very subjective decision. Is it fair to have everyone make the same? It depends who you ask and ultimately enforcement of this is how you get a really brutal totalitarian society (have her look up the Soviet unions rise to power or the Chinese cultural revolution). Generally, what history has shown is it’s very hard to use a government to engineer a society and it usually leads to not the most efficient distribution of food, goods, and services. I.e. starvation and wealth inequality. That said, it doesn’t mean there should be no rules in a free market society or that rich people shouldn’t get taxed more. Point being, you can still want social welfare and taxation on ultra wealthy people, while also being pro capitalism. 

TLDR: banks facilitate new companies growing. Without I banks it would be harder to raise money or get in and out of investments for new companies. As a result, we wouldn’t get innovation which not only saves lives, but also makes everyone’s lives easier.

Ask her to explain how funding new companies that make new products that didn’t exist before is evil.

To be honest, I feel like the only way to any change is through capitalism. You create change from within. When you get older and have higher positions, you have the ability to fund or work with companies pushing ESG or social issue initiatives. From the outside, you’re just a bystander complaining. Working in investment banking doesn’t make you an upstanding citizen by any means, but I find it hard to believe you can make any true change except in the world of business or politics. And we know how often corruption runs rampant in politics too.