Ok. Realistic scenario here. My daughter is majoring in Econ. She isn’t interested in striving for the top at this point in time. She would honestly be content with a relatively interesting desk job, and she would prefer something that would have some flexibility in schedule during her parenting years. What type of position should she look at?

Anonymous wrote:Some of you seem to be obsessively focused on kids with econ majors getting on a PhD track or even a pure econ track for a job. I don't think that's what the OP asked about. Entry level jobs do not require a PhD. There are plenty of econ majors who double major and bring other skills to the table. Consulting firms and finance firms are hiring them for their analytical skills, not their deep knowledge of economic theory. My DC was an econ major and I posted earlier that he is working in consulting with a starting package over $100k. Understanding economics is helpful in his role, but it's not an economic research job (which he never considered as he wasn't interested in that path). Ultimately he will get an MBA if he feels like he needs it for advancement.

Yes, PP! I was interested in the availability and chances of landing an entry level job in Econ. Also, if recruiting is done primarily in the fall. TIA!

Anonymous wrote:Some of you seem to be obsessively focused on kids with econ majors getting on a PhD track or even a pure econ track for a job. I don't think that's what the OP asked about. Entry level jobs do not require a PhD. There are plenty of econ majors who double major and bring other skills to the table. Consulting firms and finance firms are hiring them for their analytical skills, not their deep knowledge of economic theory. My DC was an econ major and I posted earlier that he is working in consulting with a starting package over $100k. Understanding economics is helpful in his role, but it's not an economic research job (which he never considered as he wasn't interested in that path). Ultimately he will get an MBA if he feels like he needs it for advancement.

OP did said her kid was looking for an "Econ job".

Not "consulting, then business school" which is a path taken by a gazillion kids with all sorts of majors.

Some of you seem to be obsessively focused on kids with econ majors getting on a PhD track or even a pure econ track for a job. I don't think that's what the OP asked about. Entry level jobs do not require a PhD. There are plenty of econ majors who double major and bring other skills to the table. Consulting firms and finance firms are hiring them for their analytical skills, not their deep knowledge of economic theory. My DC was an econ major and I posted earlier that he is working in consulting with a starting package over $100k. Understanding economics is helpful in his role, but it's not an economic research job (which he never considered as he wasn't interested in that path). Ultimately he will get an MBA if he feels like he needs it for advancement.

Anonymous wrote:Related, or not - I have a very econ-focused son looking at colleges who may well be into academia for the long-haul. (Capitalist, but not an active capitalist.) Can you share more on this - how would one compare, say, a SLAC such as Pomona vs a major econ program such as UChicago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: 10-20% at the top programs push on to academia.

Not a chance in hell this is true. The biggest producers of Econ PhDs on a per capital basis are LACs. There is no way that even 10% of my school's Econ majors get PhDs.

Traditionally elite SLACs generate a greater number of PhDs that other schools in all disciplines on a per capita basis. Whether this is because of self-selection during college admissions or from close working experiences with professor, I do not know. In particular, Swarthmore, Carleton, Grinnell, and Reed are top producers. See: http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/.
Personally, I am a Carleton alum and went to a Top 3 PhD program.
I disagree with the above poster who states that larger schools will offer greater resources for undergraduate research. think that Economics departments are generally labor-constrained only.
Realize that in any Econ program, only a few students are interested in pursuing a PhD. Major requirements are designed for the average Econ student and generally lack the math necessary to prepare for a PhD program. PhD training has required greater technical expertise over the years (much to the detriment of the profession IMHO)
I second the poster's suggestion that you look for overall fit primarily when choosing a college.
Since you mentioned Chicago, I would say that Chicago is in many ways the most SLAC-like school among non-SLAC schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WTF is a freshwater school

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltwater_and_freshwater_economics

As a microeconomist, I would have to say that generally macroeconomic is BS, particularly because of the use of ad hoc assumptions. It seems that this distinction was made by macro folks rather than calling themselves bogus macro people and completely bogus macro people.

Anonymous wrote:Related, or not - I have a very econ-focused son looking at colleges who may well be into academia for the long-haul. (Capitalist, but not an active capitalist.) Can you share more on this - how would one compare, say, a SLAC such as Pomona vs a major econ program such as UChicago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: 10-20% at the top programs push on to academia.

Not a chance in hell this is true. The biggest producers of Econ PhDs on a per capital basis are LACs. There is no way that even 10% of my school's Econ majors get PhDs.

I know people from both LACs and the major schools such as the Ivies who went on to receive economic PhDs and are now in academia/research.

What I would do is to look up the economics departments at all the colleges your son is interested in and see where the faculty received all their degrees. I quickly looked at Pomona's and both undergrad and grad are listed. You find a lot of non-Americans too, usually having come to the US for their PhD.

I don't think a school like Pomona or Williams will hurt your son, and may allow him to develop very close relationships with professors in a small department, but I also suspect a big school will provide more resources, with the downsides perhaps more competition among more majors for those resources and especially undergrad research positions. For example, your son may be very bright and if he went to Pomona he could be the star student for the department, but if he went to Chicago, he might be a smaller fish in a bigger pool and will be overlooked by a handful of truly brilliant students dominating most of the faculty's interest.

A great way to demonstrate interest in the economics programs at any school your son is interested is contacting the economics department and asking for information placement of recent grads into PhD programs. They will maintain those records and should be able to provide it to your son.

Anonymous wrote:WTF is a freshwater school

There are ways to ask nicely. Are you aware of that?


A freshwater school is one of the econ departments in the upper midwest, where there are big lakes.

It is a distinction we use in the field. One of the big differences is that those of us at the big publics have fewer fellowships available but more teaching/research opportunities because the schools are bigger and TAs more commonly used in the service classes (Econ 101, Econ 102, Calculus.... all those giant ones).

Anonymous wrote:Any top school econ major interested in consulting but in doing work that is more rigorous and related to economics than management consulting is should look into economic consulting. The firms that do this include Analysis Group, Bates White, Charles River, Compass Lexecon, Cornerstone, and NERA. These firms support lawyers in various types of litigation, such as antitrust cases, and clients in front of various government bodies such as the DOJ, FTC, or SEC. The entry-level jobs have little travel, around 50 hours a week of work, lots of responsibility rather quickly, and the chance to learn how to work with large datasets.

Former economic consultant (specializing in DOJ and anti-fraud) and while there was relatively little travel, the "good" teams/assignments where you learned a lot and got responsibility required more than 50 hours a week.

I actually got a BA/MA combination so I technically had a MA when I started.

I eventually ended up (with some luck) in a job where you typically need a PhD, and I supervise people with PhDs and Master's degrees.

Anonymous wrote:WTF is a freshwater school

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltwater_and_freshwater_economics

WTF is a freshwater school

Anonymous wrote:A real economist has a PhD. I'm not sure of the value of someone with a 4yr degree in economics.

They are bright undergrads with some quant skills. Still unformed and young. They have as much value as any other person with a bachelors... yet they get jobs and grow up.

In my PhD program, albeit a generation ago, most of the Americans had taken some time off before starting the PhD. Some of us to regroup because our undergrad wasn’t sufficient training, some because we had the kind of jobs discussed in this thread. Some because a PhD is loooong and it is best to feel refreshed.

The people who had RA jobs were well placed to get RA jobs from professors and to work on their research. That is a much better way to pay for grad school than years of teaching. And often that establishes a long term relationship with that faculty member along with publications.

People like me who didn’t have great skills upon arrival had to teach. After a year or two of that it doesn’t offer more professional development.

If your kid is truly great and gets into one of the top coastal schools they might be lucky enough to get fully funded without having to work most years. It probably isn’t a good idea to bank on that happening for your soon-to-be Freshman. The freshwater schools generally require teaching or research assistantships.

Anonymous wrote:Related, or not - I have a very econ-focused son looking at colleges who may well be into academia for the long-haul. (Capitalist, but not an active capitalist.) Can you share more on this - how would one compare, say, a SLAC such as Pomona vs a major econ program such as UChicago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: 10-20% at the top programs push on to academia.

Not a chance in hell this is true. The biggest producers of Econ PhDs on a per capital basis are LACs. There is no way that even 10% of my school's Econ majors get PhDs.

I’m not the person who posted the comment but it is true. Per capital, liberal arts colleges produce more Graduate students. Of course, in the tails of a distribution things are sometimes a bit different.

I do know that when I was at my ivy it felt like everyone was going for a PhD, but that had more to do with my small subset of “everyone’s” than the truth.

My bet would be that you shouldn’t choose between Pomona and U of C based on this because the difference won’t be meaningful. Choose which Is more likely to bring out the best in your kid.

A real economist has a PhD. I'm not sure of the value of someone with a 4yr degree in economics.

Related, or not - I have a very econ-focused son looking at colleges who may well be into academia for the long-haul. (Capitalist, but not an active capitalist.) Can you share more on this - how would one compare, say, a SLAC such as Pomona vs a major econ program such as UChicago?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: 10-20% at the top programs push on to academia.

Not a chance in hell this is true. The biggest producers of Econ PhDs on a per capital basis are LACs. There is no way that even 10% of my school's Econ majors get PhDs.