Confused on what to do

College Majors Business Major
21

<p>"I changed my post so as to explain myself more clearly. As you can see, I edited and deleted various comments so as to explain myself better. Why couldn't you just wait till I had my new post typed out? A little patience goes a long way. "</p>

<p>How was I supposed to know that you were editing your responses? Your responses were there when I clicked the reply button. Perhaps YOU should wait before hitting the submit button.</p>

<p>"The nature of actuarial science makes it var more versatile. Actuaries work for business consulting corporations, accounting firms, insurance firms, government areas."</p>

<p>Again, accountants work in all of those industries.</p>

<p>"Interestingly enough, some actuaries down the track take on specialized accounting jobs "</p>

<p>Like what? If you're talking about an actual accounting position, it is unlikely that someone without an accounting education would be able to do it--same goes for an actuary's job. There's a difference between working as an accountant and working for an accounting firm. If you're talking about public accounting, you are required to be a CPA (which requires an accounting education). If you're talking about an upper-level private accounting position, you're going to need financial accounting and reporting experience.</p>

<p>"The business and tax laws of a certain country heavily regulate the work and practice of region -specific accountants."</p>

<p>Foreign-located subsidiaries and foreign firms that are publicly traded on US exchanges are required to follow US GAAP. Foreign companies with locations in the US and US subsidiaries outside of the US have to deal with complex US taxation issues. All of the large accounting firms are multinational and offer experienced professionals the chance to work in other countries to some extent.</p>

<p>"Laid back and relaxed nature of the job."</p>

<p>You're assuming that everyone wants the same type of job and that everyone has the same temperament.</p>

<p>"You CANNOT do this in accounting. You quite working for a big four, good luck finding another job. You can't move around and relocate with such ease and poise but an actuary can. "</p>

<p>What are you talking about? When you work in auditing at the Big 4, your job is (and I'm oversimplifying) to go from company to company and deconstruct their accounting systems. You learn intimate details about businesses and industries. You also learn very specific skills and how to handle certain reporting requirements. Many jobs REQUIRE applicants to be CPAs with Big 4 experience. There's no substitute for what you learn in public accounting. Ex-Big 4 accountants can work in all kinds of positions--some go to other accounting firms, some go into finance positions, some go into management (and work their way up to being a CFO). The exit opportunities are great--that's why working for a Big 4 firm is so sought after.</p>

<p>"Nature of the job. Acturies are statisticians. Accountants are not."</p>

<p>So? I didn't realize that statistics (which I do find interesting) was the ONLY interesting subject out there. My field requires me to be good at both math AND law. I enjoy that. I find that more interesting.</p>

22

<p>How am I supposed to respond to you if you repeatedly edit and delete your posts while I am typing my reply?</p>

<p>You seem to be stuck on the idea that there are certain jobs that are superior to others (just as many believe that there are certain schools that are superior to all others). That's not how life works. The world is more complex than that. People have different goals, enjoy different things and have different temperaments. Not everyone finds statistics to be the most interesting thing in the world. If statistics is very interesting to you, then being an actuary is probably a good job for you. THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOUR JOB MORE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE ELSE'S NOR DOES IT MAKE YOU MORE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE ELSE.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
What are you talking about? When you work in auditing at the Big 4, your job is (and I'm oversimplifying) to go from company to company and deconstruct their accounting systems. You learn intimate details about businesses and industries. You also learn very specific skills and how to handle certain reporting requirements. Many jobs REQUIRE applicants to be CPAs with Big 4 experience. There's no substitute for what you learn in public accounting. Ex-Big 4 accountants can work in all kinds of positions--some go to other accounting firms, some go into finance positions, some go into management (and work their way up to being a CFO). The exit opportunities are great--that's why working for a Big 4 firm is so sought after.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Keep in mind you HAVE to work for at least 3-4 years before you're this lucrative. Also keep in mind this is if you work for a big four accounting firm.</p>

<p>For example, many accountants cannot make it into a big four firm. These accountants don't have such nice exit options and can't just quit so easily. The stamp of where you work is so important as an accoutant - actuaries aren't bound by this. For them, working at a no - name company in downtown idaho is just as good as working for PWC in Chicago. The exit options are just as great. Only accountants working for a good 3-4 years at a top notch firm like PWC have this ability to switch out.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
How am I supposed to respond to you if you repeatedly edit and delete your posts while I am typing my reply?</p>

<p>You seem to be stuck on the idea that there are certain jobs that are superior to others (just as many believe that there are certain schools that are superior to all others). That's not how life works. The world is more complex than that. People have different goals, enjoy different things and have different temperaments. Not everyone finds statistics to be the most interesting thing in the world. If statistics is very interesting to you, then being an actuary is probably a good job for you. THAT DOESN'T MAKE YOUR JOB MORE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE ELSE'S NOR DOES IT MAKE YOU MORE SUPERIOR TO ANYONE ELSE.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Ryanbis, what I edited wasn't significant. I was just polishing up details. Stop quibbling so much. Relax. I'm trying to make it so that we have a decent / educated argument without direct insults. There's no need to capitalize sentences. </p>

<p>As far as this idea of "superiority", notice I only mentioned this word ONCE in my main argument (post #19). For my apparantely, heinous sin of mentioning the word superior just once in my main argument, let me be humble and take it back.</p>

<p>I will replace the word "superior" with "more lucrative, more relaxed, and more interesting".</p>

<p>You do not need to lecture me that "People have different goals, enjoy different things and have different temperaments. " I completely understand this. This is why I SPECIFICALLY said, this profession is only for you if you like math.</p>

<p>If I'm really so obsessed with superiority, I would have asked the OP to get a law degree from Harvard and then run for the senate at a very young age.</p>

25

<p>Furthermore, even though I said the word "statistician"; it was inferred that meant company statistician. This is different from your regular p.h.d. math statistician who models biological growth patterns. I didn't think you take it to face value.</p>

<p>What an actuary (i.e. informal business company statistician) does also involves a significant amount of financial and investment analysis - accountants also study a lot of this. An actuary is basically part statistician and part accountant. So accountants can MORE than relate to what an actuary does because they have the financial analysis background - they just don't have the additional math. </p>

<p>This is why for people considering accounting, it's more a great idea to consider actuarial science. I see absoutely no mistake in mentioning actuarial in here. Don't tell me it's great for me because I'm interested in stats. People who like stats as well as accounting can relate to actuarial science (maybe not practice it, but at least relate to it).</p>

26

<p>"What an actuary (i.e. informal business company statistician) does also involves a significant amount of financial and investment analysis - accountants also study a lot of this. An actuary is basically part statistician and part accountant. So accountants can MORE than relate to what an actuary does because they have the financial analysis background - they just don't have the additional math. "</p>

<p>No, that's not correct at all. Investment analysis is finance, not accounting. Accountants may go on to be investment analysts, because financial statement analysis requires a thorough understanding of financial statements; however, accounting and finance are incredibly different. Actuaries are NOT part statistician and part accountant. The things that accountants and statisticians study are completely different and unrelated. </p>

<p>"As far as this idea of "superiority", notice I only mentioned this word ONCE in my main argument (post #19). "</p>

<p>I refer back to my original post for the untlimate comments in question. You did more than state that one job is superior than the other--you called into question the intelligence of those who pursue accounting.</p>

<p>"For example, many accountants cannot make it into a big four firm."</p>

<p>And I'm sure that there are statisticians that can't make it through all of their exams, or that make poor judgement calls and estimations on the job and lose work from it. Either way, even accountants that do not work for the Big 4 find work. Their jobs may not be as lucrative (although some are), but accountants usually do not have trouble finding work.</p>

27

<p>
[quote]
Actuaries are NOT part statistician and part accountant.

[/quote]

Is that why actuaries take on specialized accounting roles down the line like being controllers? If indeed, an actuary doesn't know anything about what an accountant does, how could this be possible? Answer this question. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The things that accountants and statisticians study are completely different and unrelated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>When I say statistician, I'm talking about our informal company statistician here - not your typical math p.h.d. statistician. I thought I made this clear.</p>

<p>You say that finance and accounting are completely different. Yet accountants study interest theory do they not? Rates, returns? They advise people on how to invest in various funds (pension, etc...) do they not? A lot of this is studied by actuaries as well.</p>

<p>Bottom line is this, whether you like it or not; half of what actuaries study and half of what accountants study is similar. This is why companies like PWC love to have actuaries working not only in their Property and casualty division but also their annuities, pension areas alongside accountants.</p>

28

<p>"You say that finance and accounting are completely different. Yet accountants study interest theory do they not? Rates, returns? They advise people on how to invest in various funds (pension, etc...) do they not? A lot of this is studied by actuaries as well."</p>

<p>Why is this so hard to understand? Interest rate theories and rate/return analysis are in the realm of finance. Investment advice is financial planning and consulting. Are those services provided by many accountants? Yes. Do accountants need to study a bit of finance? Yes. Does that make those topics accounting? NO!</p>

<p>Do actuaries study tax law? Business law? Auditing? Financial accounting standards? Those are the major areas that comprise an accounting education.</p>

<p>Let me put it this way: if the CPA exam represents the minimum amount of knowledge that a CPA should have, only approximately 17% of the 14 hour exam covers content that an actuary might also study. That 17% represents the Business Environment section, which covers finance, economics, business structures, information technology/information systems, managerial accounting and statistics. The other 83% of the exam covers content that an actuary would not study. </p>

<p>"This is why companies like PWC love to have actuaries working not only in their Property and casualty division but also their annuities, pension areas alongside accountants."</p>

<p>There's a difference between what the accountants do and what the actuaries do when it comes to pensions. Actuaries are hired to calculate certain cost numbers--it is the accountants that determine what to do with those numbers. You're confusing accounting services with consulting services--they are different.</p>

29

<p>
[quote]
The nature of actuarial science makes it far more versatile. Actuaries work for business consulting corporations, accounting firms, insurance firms, government areas. Actuaries specialize in reserving, rate-making, property and casualty insurance, life and health insurance, and many other different kinds of job functions. Interestingly enough, some actuaries down the track take on specialized accounting jobs (accountants can't switch out to actuarial jobs even if they want to).</p>

<p>-Again, VERSATILITY. Internationally, actuaries can work almost anywhere. Bermuda, hong kong, tokyo, india, china, europe - almost anywhere they choose to. The reason is because there are few actuaries in this world and the work nature across the globe of exactly what an actuary does is very similar. Accountant is the complete opposite. The business and tax laws of a certain country heavily regulate the work and practice of region -specific accountants. Accountants just aren't as business versatile as actuaries</p>

<p>Demand. Right now accountants are doing well in employment I admit. However, actuarial demand is also very high and unlike accounting, always has been very high. It's much more stable a profession because there is a limit to entry. Only few can do this and because of that, you can be safe that this market won't be saturated.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>These ignorant statements are all I needed in order to completely disqualify your knowledge about the accounting industry, epoch. You may seriously want to do some research and then come back here and renounce your ignorance.</p>

30

<p>What state do you live in?</p>

31

<p>Um guys,</p>

<p>If I can just interrupt you both, I talked to my dad about what I want to do and how I can get the best job he reccommended that as a undergrad I do a major in finance and minor or double major in some kind of engineering, after that in grad school he says I should do accounting or take a management degree.</p>

<p>He said such a wide array of skills would help me land a job that required both financial/economical skills mixed with engineering and of course management. Usually my dad is knowledgable in these kinds of things (in India he was VP of a company called Ispat and worked side by side with Laxmi Mittal), but I don't really follow along with him on this one, do you guys think this is a good idea to take this mix of majors when I attend college?</p>

<p>The only challenge I can think of in doing this is finding a school thats good in both finance/engineering etc.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

32

<p>Don't worry about a school being strong in engineering, because you're only minoring anyways. Your father's idea is a very good one, and one that more people should do. Recruiters are attracted to the skills that engineering students develop, so a mix of finance and engineering should without a doubt help.</p>

33

<p>
[quote]
Originally posted by Tpeck</p>

<p>what does the salary look like for an actuary as you pass more and more exams?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>A hell of a lot more than what accountants or engineers make. Look at dwsimpson salary. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.dwsimpson.com/salary.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dwsimpson.com/salary.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>The only people that really significantly make more than actuaries (while still in their youth anyhow) who pass all their exams fast are investment bankers, management consultants, some types of lawyers, successful quants, stock traders, and other i-banking related jobs.</p>

<p>Medicine takes way too long to complete by the time you finish your residency so I'm not including it.</p>

34

<p>In their youth? You must be blind or just didnt notice the number of years that were completed before reaching the pay peak, and you must be totally clueless about the thousands of other career choices that pay just as well. Not to mention most people will finish their residencies with pay well ahead of the average for a 30-32 year old actuary. You are so freakin biased and miss informed that it is sickening.</p>

35

<p>Look at the graph more closely you,</p>

<p>5 years + FCAS designation is on average a 150,000 salary. I know relatives who work in the insurance business and they say this is actually the lower end. Yeah I'm misinformed? </p>

<p>That means your 27 and making 150K (given you graduate when your 22-23 like your supposed to). That's why I said in my previous post, this is given you can pass all exams fast. Look at the rise in the salary as you pass the exams -> you don't see this kind of trend anywhere except the jobs I mentioned earlier. 32? Yeah that's the average. This isn't the profession if your average. There are quite a few people who finish all exams very fast. They usually end up getting additional certifications like CPA/CFA/CPCU. Lately, there's been a growing trend where young actuaries who've got their certification have been working as structurers at i-banks and soon become traders.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You are so freakin biased and miss informed that it is sickening.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Your idiocy is even more sickening. Aren't you that community college girl?</p>

36

<p>LOL you are losing one war epoch so you are trying to start another?? Why don't you go troll elsewhere.</p>