Arguing with DS over major

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a cultural difference.

Asians would never stand for those crappy majors. The whole white let them find themselves bull shit is why their numbers at TJ are falling.

The only sucesful people who majored in liberal arts are those that went to grad school for something useful.

Alas true. Saw the news today: 2/3 of incoming class at TJ is Asian American. That's just not right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a cultural difference.

Asians would never stand for those crappy majors. The whole white let them find themselves bull shit is why their numbers at TJ are falling.

The only sucesful people who majored in liberal arts are those that went to grad school for something useful.

Alas true. Saw the news today: 2/3 of incoming class at TJ is Asian American. That's just not right.

So should TJ discriminate against asians or are you lamenting that others are not competing?

[Anonymous]

My history major son is in the financial sector in NYC and making enough money for an apartment in Soho - no roommates. Younger son, an English major, is in the financial sector in this area. He graduated last year. I think they've been able to land jobs because they work hard, they believe in themselves and developed excellent writing and critical thinking skills through the liberal arts. And part of them believing in themselves is that their parents do too.

I feel sorry for OPs son. Having parents who don't believe in you is a real strike against you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My history major son is in the financial sector in NYC and making enough money for an apartment in Soho - no roommates. Younger son, an English major, is in the financial sector in this area. He graduated last year. I think they've been able to land jobs because they work hard, they believe in themselves and developed excellent writing and critical thinking skills through the liberal arts. And part of them believing in themselves is that their parents do too.

I feel sorry for OPs son. Having parents who don't believe in you is a real strike against you.

Bet they got those gigs based on alumni networking and the school they went to. Finance positions are all about prestige and networking.

Major matters unless you go to a top 20 school or plan on a graduate degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My history major son is in the financial sector in NYC and making enough money for an apartment in Soho - no roommates. Younger son, an English major, is in the financial sector in this area. He graduated last year. I think they've been able to land jobs because they work hard, they believe in themselves and developed excellent writing and critical thinking skills through the liberal arts. And part of them believing in themselves is that their parents do too.

I feel sorry for OPs son. Having parents who don't believe in you is a real strike against you.

I am a PP. I don't disagree with this because I have posted as such. However, I also asked those who posted anecdotes like this to share which school they graduated from and if they obtained such positions via OCI, cold applying, or network/alumni.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My history major son is in the financial sector in NYC and making enough money for an apartment in Soho - no roommates. Younger son, an English major, is in the financial sector in this area. He graduated last year. I think they've been able to land jobs because they work hard, they believe in themselves and developed excellent writing and critical thinking skills through the liberal arts. And part of them believing in themselves is that their parents do too.

I feel sorry for OPs son. Having parents who don't believe in you is a real strike against you.

Good for your sons, but if someone wanted to work in the finance sector, why not just major in finance? That seems like much less of a gamble than majoring in Dnglish/History and expecting to work in the finance sector. I mean, if someone wants to work in the fields of history or English then great, major in history or English, but why major in them if you don't? Not sure I understand the point of your point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My history major son is in the financial sector in NYC and making enough money for an apartment in Soho - no roommates. Younger son, an English major, is in the financial sector in this area. He graduated last year. I think they've been able to land jobs because they work hard, they believe in themselves and developed excellent writing and critical thinking skills through the liberal arts. And part of them believing in themselves is that their parents do too.

I feel sorry for OPs son. Having parents who don't believe in you is a real strike against you.

Good for your sons, but if someone wanted to work in the finance sector, why not just major in finance? That seems like much less of a gamble than majoring in Dnglish/History and expecting to work in the finance sector. I mean, if someone wants to work in the fields of history or English then great, major in history or English, but why major in them if you don't? Not sure I understand the point of your point.

+1
PPs sons do what they love which, it turns out, is finance.

[Anonymous]

Lol @ OP. I majored in Women's Studies and went on to a T14 law school.

[Anonymous]

I'm less concerned about OP's son's major than the idea that he chose it to avoid taking calculus. Seriously? Most of the successful careers mentioned here require pretty solid analytical skills. Anyone with those skills should not have problems with or unfounded fears of calculus.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In this economic climate, the days of doing 'hobby' majors r over!

Exactly. That's why Liberal Arts is the way to go. Technology is changing too fast to know what skills will be needed in 10 years. LeRning how to think will benefit you forever.

Wrong. I think the days of the SLACs are over too. And I went to a SLAC, majored in history and went to Yale law school. But nowadays I probably couldn't get back in my SLAC and Yale Law School. It's just too damn competitive. It's more important to get current with technology and move forward with it. Liberal arts doesn't teach you how to think (or spell, obviously). It's a creature of the past when people could easily get in and parents and loan programs made it affordable to spend fouryears study geology, history, philosophy or whatever. That's no longer the case. A relative of mine graduated from a SLAC with a puff major and over $200K in loans. He's bussing tables at an I-Hop. I am not making this up. At 26 he is going to have to file for bankruptcy (and yes I know the fed loans aren't discharged by bankruptcy).

[Anonymous]

Is there any other situation where parents would "invest" between $100-$200K without regard to the "return" that will be result? Who in their right mind would expend that sort of money on their kid's college if the likelihood is that at the end of four years, he/she will end up earning a pittance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In this economic climate, the days of doing 'hobby' majors r over!

Exactly. That's why Liberal Arts is the way to go. Technology is changing too fast to know what skills will be needed in 10 years. LeRning how to think will benefit you forever.

Wrong. I think the days of the SLACs are over too. And I went to a SLAC, majored in history and went to Yale law school. But nowadays I probably couldn't get back in my SLAC and Yale Law School. It's just too damn competitive. It's more important to get current with technology and move forward with it. Liberal arts doesn't teach you how to think (or spell, obviously). It's a creature of the past when people could easily get in and parents and loan programs made it affordable to spend fouryears study geology, history, philosophy or whatever. That's no longer the case. A relative of mine graduated from a SLAC with a puff major and over $200K in loans. He's bussing tables at an I-Hop. I am not making this up. At 26 he is going to have to file for bankruptcy (and yes I know the fed loans aren't discharged by bankruptcy).

honestly, law school should not be 4+3 years. If you want to sit for the LSAT at the end of HS and can nail a 170+ and you write well, you should be able to matriculate into LS directly. Unless you are doing patent or something where you need an science/engineering background.

Furthermore with MOOC's, I could see a lot of schools closing and/or shrinking save for maybe the top 100 universities and maybe 50 or so lac's.

[Anonymous]

honestly, law school should not be 4+3 years. If you want to sit for the LSAT at the end of HS and can nail a 170+ and you write well, you should be able to matriculate into LS directly. Unless you are doing patent or something where you need an science/engineering background.

That's how it works in most other countries...law and medicine are undergraduate degrees essentially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In this economic climate, the days of doing 'hobby' majors r over!

Exactly. That's why Liberal Arts is the way to go. Technology is changing too fast to know what skills will be needed in 10 years. LeRning how to think will benefit you forever.

Wrong. I think the days of the SLACs are over too. And I went to a SLAC, majored in history and went to Yale law school. But nowadays I probably couldn't get back in my SLAC and Yale Law School. It's just too damn competitive. It's more important to get current with technology and move forward with it. Liberal arts doesn't teach you how to think (or spell, obviously). It's a creature of the past when people could easily get in and parents and loan programs made it affordable to spend fouryears study geology, history, philosophy or whatever. That's no longer the case. A relative of mine graduated from a SLAC with a puff major and over $200K in loans. He's bussing tables at an I-Hop. I am not making this up. At 26 he is going to have to file for bankruptcy (and yes I know the fed loans aren't discharged by bankruptcy).

Liberal arts don't teach you how to think? Philosophy doesn't teach you how to think? Conducting history research and writing it up doesn't teach you how to think? And by the way, geology is a science.

I'm sorry your relative is a slacker but thats hardly a scientific sample. Then again, you don't seem to understand what science is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

honestly, law school should not be 4+3 years. If you want to sit for the LSAT at the end of HS and can nail a 170+ and you write well, you should be able to matriculate into LS directly. Unless you are doing patent or something where you need an science/engineering background.

That's how it works in most other countries...law and medicine are undergraduate degrees essentially.

+1