Stephens: To the Class of 2012 Attention graduates: Tone down your egos, shape up your minds.

It's also very generalizing and uses a data point of one. This guy is an idiot of the highest order. But what else can you expect from someone who has to write for a living that tries to make a statistical argument?
 
As if there is no shortage of idiots in the class of 2011, 2010, 2009, etc.
 
I completely agree with him. I know people who are graduating with 2:1's in quantitative subjects in the UK (which is the grade threshold for getting a job) at russell group universities who still think that 1/(x^2+y^2)^0.5 = 1/x + 1/y or can't integrate log(x) or similar.

People are far too confident of their abilities these days. What we need is a healthy dose of modesty and recognition that even if you graduated top of your class, you don't know jack shit.
 
Barny said:
I completely agree with him. I know people who are graduating with 2:1's in quantitative subjects in the UK (which is the grade threshold for getting a job) at russell group universities who still think that 1/(x^2+y^2)^0.5 = 1/x + 1/y or can't integrate log(x) or similar.

People are far too confident of their abilities these days. What we need is a healthy dose of modesty and recognition that even if you graduated top of your class, you don't know jack shit.
Click to expand...

No shit? How about an employer that's willing to hire us in full acknowledgement of the fact that we "don't know jack shit"? Every single employer as far as I've seen expects entry-level candidates to have this, that, the other thing, the kitchen sink, and a bag of chips to top it off, so to speak, because within a week of posting a job app, they can get that.

And in the meantime, those of us who graduated 2009 and after are fucked for life.
 
IlyaKEightSix said:
No shit? How about an employer that's willing to hire us in full acknowledgement of the fact that we "don't know jack shit"? Every single employer as far as I've seen expects entry-level candidates to have this, that, the other thing, the kitchen sink, and a bag of chips to top it off, so to speak, because within a week of posting a job app, they can get that.

And in the meantime, those of us who graduated 2009 and after are fucked for life.
Click to expand...

It's a buyer's market, that's why. Employers can be as picky as they want and still find people measuring up to their exacting specs. Furthermore the job market is not going to change for the foreseeable future (if ever). The WSJ article is advising young grads to be more accepting of their dismal fate and set their sights lower. Meanwhile the second edition of Mark Ehrman's book came out a couple of months back and I recommend reading it.
 
Ahh, so that's why you're so angry at the article that you fail to come up with a coherent argument.

He's right, you know. I won't go too much into it because it is overwrought and over-writ already.

Yet, Ilya, I admit you are not without cause. I dislike Stephens' self-righteous attitude, it denies the fact that everybody was young once - the difference is that there were more opportunities for previous generations to gain the experience to tame the stupidity and sense of entitlement. Now, those opportunities are far and few between, and not through any fault of our own.

I believe this attitude has to change if we as a society are to move forward. High unemployment is with us; I feel there's been a fundamental shift in our economics, and it's here to stay for at least a decade. The older generation can't just keep ignoring it and blaming the younger one for being... too young.
 
Yike Lu said:
Now, those opportunities are far and few between, and not through any fault of our own.
Click to expand...
Yike Lu, there are opportunities and plenty of them, but there not where people expect or want them to be. This notion of people making big bucks "quant trading" - it's a pipe dream. Most traders aren't quants and most traders don't make a killing.

For those that really want quant finance, there's model review, market risk, credit risk, op risk, audit, and price review. All of these areas are hiring. They're not glamourous, but they're intellectually stimulating jobs that pay well and that are reasonably safe.
 
I'm not even saying for myself or Ilya's sake really, but for the broader economy. I have no reason to complain myself, except what I see as a harmful attitude of the older generation towards the younger, given the current circumstances. In a good job market, I would completely back Stephens' point. Actually, I think the extent to which Ilya has taken his anger is too far.

The younger generation has to adapt and move away from the easy stuff (that Stephens talks about) that doesn't improve (or even hurts) their employability, be willing to take less glamorous jobs as you suggest. But, this takes time and in the meanwhile, unemployment is in fact high.

The older generation has to realize the old days are over and the balance is far in the employer's favor as BBW mentions and Ilya so keenly knows. And it has to realize how long it can take - an out of work lit major isn't going to turn into an elite programmer over night.

Again, I'm generalizing, not so much talking about the financial sector.
 
Yike Lu said:
I'm not even saying for myself or Ilya's sake really, but for the broader economy. I have no reason to complain myself, except what I see as a harmful attitude of the older generation towards the younger, given the current circumstances. In a good job market, I would completely back Stephens' point. Actually, I think the extent to which Ilya has taken his anger is too far.

The younger generation has to adapt and move away from the easy stuff (that Stephens talks about) that doesn't improve (or even hurts) their employability, be willing to take less glamorous jobs as you suggest. But, this takes time and in the meanwhile, unemployment is in fact high.

The older generation has to realize the old days are over and the balance is far in the employer's favor as BBW mentions and Ilya so keenly knows. And it has to realize how long it can take - an out of work lit major isn't going to turn into an elite programmer over night.

Again, I'm generalizing, not so much talking about the financial sector.
Click to expand...

At which point did I take my anger too far? An asinine judgmental post deserves nothing but scorn, especially because this luddite, had he graduated today, would have the phrase "would you like fries with that" ringing out of his ears when he went to sleep.

With all of these "must have experience to gain experience" job ads, who do they think is going to be spending the money to drive our GDP? You know, C+I+G+NX? 70% of our GDP is based on C. And if the jobs stop, then C stops, then people lose *more* jobs because nobody's buying anything, and down we go. And considering that we millennials have no choice but to vote for the dems because the republicans would just sell us all into wage slavery for their wealthy buddies anyway, nobody even pays attention to us besides some lip-service pandering over the interest rates of student loans. Hello, it doesn't matter what the interest rates on student loans are--if we can't find jobs, we're not paying a penny of them anyway! But who cares about us? After all, we're not writing the fundraising checks for either side anyway.
 
Do you hear yourself talk? You have a lot of intelligent points, but it all gets lost in the haze...
 
Yike Lu said:
Again, I'm generalizing, not so much talking about the financial sector.
Click to expand...

Quite right. High unemployment among the young is a global phenomenon -- which ignited both the "Arab Spring" and the Occupy movement (though the latter is more of a joke). It is also high in Europe, particularly among Club Med. The difference in the United States is high and non-dischargeable student debt and a country caught in political stasis as it hurtles downwards. There's a good book review by John Gray that's worth a glance. More on stasis can be found in the Archdruid's latest essay.
 
bigbadwolf said:
Quite right. High unemployment among the young is a global phenomenon -- which ignited both the "Arab Spring" and the Occupy movement (though the latter is more of a joke). It is also high in Europe, particularly among Club Med. The difference in the United States is high and non-dischargeable student debt and a country caught in political stasis as it hurtles downwards. There's a good book review by John Gray that's worth a glance. More on stasis can be found in the Archdruid's latest essay.
Click to expand...

IMO student debt is a red herring. It doesn't matter what amount of debt we hold, so long as we can find the jobs to pay it off. The problem is when we can't find work because the entire employment market is a bad case of recursion with no base case scenario besides "work for us for free for 3-6 months and then *maybe* we'll give you a job."
 
IlyaKEightSix said:
IMO student debt is a red herring. It doesn't matter what amount of debt we hold, so long as we can find the jobs to pay it off. The problem is when we can't find work because the entire employment market is a bad case of recursion with no base case scenario besides "work for us for free for 3-6 months and then *maybe* we'll give you a job."
Click to expand...

Umm. Your first point is patently incorrect.
 
IlyaKEightSix said:
No shit? How about an employer that's willing to hire us in full acknowledgement of the fact that we "don't know jack shit"? Every single employer as far as I've seen expects entry-level candidates to have this, that, the other thing, the kitchen sink, and a bag of chips to top it off, so to speak, because within a week of posting a job app, they can get that.

And in the meantime, those of us who graduated 2009 and after are fucked for life.
Click to expand...


You completely missed the point.

The point being that there is always somebody who knows more than you. In pre-2007 era, this wasn't a problem, since banks and other places were so desperate for warm bodies they didn't give a shit whether or not you knew what you were talking about as long as you went to Harvard or MIT. Now, as bbw said, it's a buyer's market, and they want people who do know their stuff. And they do exist. They're just not very likely to have come from Hardvard/MIT et. al. Think more obscure Russian university or similar. So why should they hire you, who knows nothing, vs kid from eastern europe, who knows everything?
 
Barny said:
Umm. Your first point is patently incorrect.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have restated it. Much better to be $100,000 in debt with a well-paying job than $30,000 in debt with no prospects.

As to your other point, in my own personal case, it's because I've written software in use at three separate companies, two of them trading institutions, so I'm far from a blank slate. As for you in the general sense of the term, well, everybody is different, but are you really saying that about 50% of us should never have the opportunity to use what we've studied?
 
IlyaKEightSix said:
... but are you really saying that about 50% of us should never have the opportunity to use what we've studied?
Click to expand...

Higher education has been sold under false pretences all over the world but particularly in the US and UK (Blair's daft target was to get one of every two youngsters into higher education). It gets politicians off the hook with regard to pervasive unemployment, stagnant (if not falling) wages, and the endemic economic insecurity that now afflicts most wage-earners. The politician's response is, "Get yourself an education and the world will be your oyster." Every lying, thieving American demagogue talks about the importance of education -- Clinton, GWB, Obama. The time, the money, and the risk is yours -- all in return for a (generally meretricious) paper credential. You go into debt for that piece of paper, which essentially means indentured servitude if you manage to snag a job. The uncomfortable question of where exactly are the jobs for this credentialed population is never raised, or never spoken of as a collective problem: everyone is encouraged to see it as their own individual problem.
 
bigbadwolf said:
Higher education has been sold under false pretences all over the world but particularly in the US and UK (Blair's daft target was to get one of every two youngsters into higher education). It gets politicians off the hook with regard to pervasive unemployment, stagnant (if not falling) wages, and the endemic economic insecurity that now afflicts most wage-earners. The politician's response is, "Get yourself an education and the world will be your oyster." Every lying, thieving American demagogue talks about the importance of education -- Clinton, GWB, Obama. The time, the money, and the risk is yours -- all in return for a (generally meretricious) paper credential. You go into debt for that piece of paper, which essentially means indentured servitude if you manage to snag a job. The uncomfortable question of where exactly are the jobs for this credentialed population is never raised, or never spoken of as a collective problem: everyone is encouraged to see it as their own individual problem.
Click to expand...

Well, the politicos like to *talk* about creating jobs, but their actions have generally left me wanting. I applied to Obama's re-election campaign and didn't even get 10 minutes from a recruiter. So, Romney would sell me and everyone my age up the river to his fat cat buddies, and Obama is either negligent or worse, but at least pays lip service to people my age.

In the meantime, anyone my age has more or less no voice, and I do wonder where we're supposed to go to speak out.
 
bigbadwolf said:
Higher education has been sold under false pretences all over the world but particularly in the US and UK (Blair's daft target was to get one of every two youngsters into higher education). It gets politicians off the hook with regard to pervasive unemployment, stagnant (if not falling) wages, and the endemic economic insecurity that now afflicts most wage-earners. The politician's response is, "Get yourself an education and the world will be your oyster." Every lying, thieving American demagogue talks about the importance of education -- Clinton, GWB, Obama. The time, the money, and the risk is yours -- all in return for a (generally meretricious) paper credential. You go into debt for that piece of paper, which essentially means indentured servitude if you manage to snag a job. The uncomfortable question of where exactly are the jobs for this credentialed population is never raised, or never spoken of as a collective problem: everyone is encouraged to see it as their own individual problem.
Click to expand...

The worst thing, which I think this article alludes to, is the arrogance with which people who graduate university have these days. They literally think the world owes them a job, and that they're the smartest, most employable people on the planet. When really they know jack shit.

I still remember when I stopped going to lectures, and my class-mates asked me why I would pay £x per year only to not receive the "product" I was buying. I told them the product I was buying was a certificate not an education, which they didn't really get, unfortunately.

I completely agree about your last point too. I find it exceptionally ironic that politicians in the UK and US keep talking about the STEM economy - how people should study engineering, maths and the sciences rather than arts subjects, because it will drive our economies forward and give employment to those leaving university. I find that logic almost laughable - you only have to look at the number of STEM students graduating into jobs that use none of their STEM skills to see how wrong their reasoning is.
 
Back
Top Bottom