<p>How do these two compare (in terms of academics, recruitment, whatever)?</p>
<p>probably about the same..northwestern has a stronger econ department though.</p>
<p>Northwestern >>>> UCLA</p>
<p>Yep. Northwestern > UCLA, especially for econ.</p>
<p>yea.</p>
<p>Northwestern's econ is on par with Chicago's dept.
UCLA is closer to Berkeley's.</p>
<p>^ What? Northwestern is on par with Berkeley >>>> UCLA.</p>
<p>UC Berkeley Nobel Laureates in Econ: </p>
<p>2001 - George A. Akerlof (Economics)
2000 - Daniel L. McFadden (Economics)
1994 - John C. Harsanyi (Economics) - deceased
1983 - Gerard Debreu (Economics) - deceased</p>
<p>UCLA: No faculty Nobel laureates in economics.
Northwestern: No faculty Nobel laureates in economics.</p>
<p>Therefore, Berkeley > Northwestern > UCLA for econ.</p>
<p>Who cares what the econ department rank is? Its crazy how so many miss the point. You go to the "great econ dept", I'll go to the one with better teaching that gets me a better job. </p>
<p>In terms of recruiting, Northwestern easily wins amongst the elite finance and consulting firms. However, UCLA does better in SoCal. So in SoCal UCLA>> NU, everywhere else NU>>UCLA.</p>
<p>^ I agree with that.</p>
<p>OP, </p>
<p>I live in LA and went to NU. My impression is that LA doesn't have as many opportunities for finance/consulting as Chicago does. If you look at USC employment report (available on the website), you can see they place very few to top finance/consulting firms. Since they are supposed to have good reputation in So Cal, my guess is this tells me there aren't many openings available. Even SF bay area seems to have more and in that case, why not consider Berkeley? Of course, if you want to get into entertainment industry (I personally know a few people that make a lot of money in it without seemingly working really hard), it would be a different story.</p>
<p>^ I have a friend that went to UCLA and majored in Econ. He's currently working as a season ticket salesman for the Dodgers.</p>
<p>Sam Lee: I'm an incoming freshman at NU. I live in SoCal too. LA and NU were included in the schools that I was accepted to/had to choose from...So I was just curious and started this thread out of boredom. : )</p>
<p>Just wondering...were you a MMSS student, Sam?</p>
<p>S2530S2, at least you made the right decision.</p>
<p>No, I wasn't. I didn't even know about it until I got to the campus as a sophomore transfer from WashU.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So I was just curious and started this thread out of boredom
[/quote]
</p>
<p>lol...stop playing games!</p>
<p>S2530S2, forget prestige. When it comes to employment, prestige plays very very little part, especially when you start including geography into factor. Answer these Q's for me:</p>
<p>1.) Where do you plan to work after college?
2.) What's your career plan?</p>
<p>If you answered So.Cal for #1 (or California), it'd make sense to choose UCLA over NU. If you chose Chicago or the area round it, then let NU be your home for the next four years.</p>
<p>Second, you gotta understand that BizEcon at UCLA is very different from the regular Econ curriculum taught at other schools. Although BizEcon is considered and Econ Dept. major, you actually take 4, 5 econ courses and the rest are devoted to the accounting courses (and one Business Course). What makes BizEcon so stand out from the rest of the econ dept majors is that you get the privilege of having to take courses from the Anderson School of Management (accounting). Take it as the honors econ major. Due to this reason, BizEcon majors tend to fare better when it comes to employment/opportunity/scholarship compared to other Econ dept. majors (BizEcon majors require certain level of GPA for admission).</p>
<p>One thing you should keep in mind, however, is that if your goal is to become an Ibanker (like 1,000 other people in this forum), then it would be wise to choose NU. This is not because that UCLA isn't good enough to open the door for you, but because... L.A. really isn't known for Investment Banking industry. Not many people care about becoming one, and you will notice that most BizEcon graduates either go to Financial (non IB) or Accounting. </p>
<p>On the other hand, Chicago is one of the main Finance capitals in the nation, so you will have more opportunity to do well in that area. </p>
<p>So yeah... prestige plays very little factor between the two schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
^ I have a friend that went to UCLA and majored in Econ. He's currently working as a season ticket salesman for the Dodgers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have friends that went to yale that are dishwashers, does that say anything about the quality of the education, NO.</p>
<p>^ You're right, didn't George W. go to Yale and Harvard?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have a friend that went to UCLA and majored in Econ. He's currently working as a season ticket salesman for the Dodgers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>and I know of plenty of people that graduated UCLA BizEcon and gone off to GS IBanking in NYC.</p>
<p>Bringing up anecdotes for some of the most exceptional cases to base one's opinion on the school's quality is the most ignorant thing to do.</p>
<p>^ LOL. Don't get me wrong, UCLA biz is good. Don't be so sensitive.</p>
<p>then don't be such a dickwad.</p>