Is Economics the greatest major ever?

>Economists wanted en masse

>Can join and or create any business they want

>Can BTFO Kung Pow-Chicken in China since you know Chinese tricks

>Can make any liberal scream and cry with the truth on economics

>Can call out any liberal politician on how stupid their policies are

>Literally needed in everything

>Pay grade can exceed any and every other major and profession

>Can meet God-tier waifus of the business world

>Can get out of debt super quick since they're money men and everyone needs an economist

>Can beat the Jews at their Jewy tricks

Refute this

(PRO TIP: YOU CAN'T)

what classes do you need to take to get this?

Got this from (((Berkeley)))

>Math 1A-1B or 16A-B (or equivalent)

>Stat 20, 21, C8/88 (total 6 units), or an approved upper division stat course with a calculus prerequisite (Stat 131A, 134, or IEOR 172 are acceptable)

>Econ 1 or 2 (or equivalent)

>Econ 100A and 100B or Econ 101A and 101B (or equivalents including UGBA 101B)

>Econ 140 or 141

>Five upper division electives courses taken within the Economics Department at UC Berkeley or coursework from other sources approved by the Economics Department, preferably in advance.

No, it's not really worth it unless you go to a select few top schools, the jobs are overwhelmingly government-related, you can't actually make all of that money you're talking about without a Ph.D., and the Ph.D. will likely not be paid for unlike Science or Math Ph.D.'s. There are honestly much better career degree options than econ. Engineering and Physics come to mind primarily.

Some people don't even go to college and still make successful businesses.

What does that have to do with what the best college major is?

yeaaah, but your average kid will never be able to do that without that tertiary education

Going into economics(or anything other than sciences, for that matter) is simply admitting that you're a useless retard with nothing useful to offer humanity. You will be given an easy job where you act like you know what you're doing and gain money that, in any decent meritocracy, would go to the ones who actually do something. The moment you invest in this career path you become just like a nigger on welfare but even more infuriating, because you're nothing more than a pompous douchebag.

TL;DR Lys, OP.

Post some job listings for economists wanted.

What about Mathematical Economics? That seems rigorous and mentally demanding.

Econ is humanities-tier

> had to invent a fake nobel prize
> top folks in the field can't make predictions
> kiked out from floor to ceiling

ecco

Economists are bullshit, they are horrible at predicting any sort of major event and you have to work at the federal reserve if you ever want to make it big.

Economics is a meme "science". The entire study falls apart without making stupid assumptions.

Pays well though if you went to good school.

>plebbit

protip: stem PhD prospects are actually awful without an elite pedigree and econ PhD prospects are good even with a shit one. Every think tank or whatever needs an economists who can produce the desired results.

>Can call out any liberal politician on how stupid their policies are

Actually learning Economics is a gate way to identifying how moronic Americans when they call literal socailist and commies, liberal.

Call a spade a spade, it's the first step to getting America out of this mess.

>>Can meet God-tier waifus of the business world
so some cunt who makes more than you for 'equality pay' and doesn't want children because muh empowered career goals

>assuming economists can predict shit

I love how people here keep conflating that economics is what you do in introductory micro and macro. That, or they think that economics is solely finance and introductory macro.

unless you specialise in econometrics your degree is a meme

>muh average people
don't underestimate people.

You don't have to predict shit you idiot. You just produce results that your employer wants you to produce. If your employer wants you to show that cutting taxes on the rich will benefit the economy, you find a way to show it. If your employer wants you to show that the minimum wage has no effect on employment, you find a way to show it.

Economics is irrelevant due to rational market theory, all assets are priced correctly already and predicting anything is impossible. What would an economist even do?

I'm majoring in finance and minoring in economics. I must become the Jew to defeat them.

No you nigger i've got a BA in economics and had to resort to burger flipping.

Don't fall for it.

Economics is actually about to become much more important than it has been for the last couple decades. A mix of Keynesian and classical economics that has been used for a while now is becoming extremely stagnant like Keynesianism did in the past, so solution are gonna have to be made pretty fast so we get back on track

If the assumptions from basic economic models were true, most economists, and whole lot of other jobs, would be useless, yes. It's like initially assuming a frictionless world and then working from there. The goal of economists in the world is precisely to reduce that friction.

>literally cannot even show a way in which economics is applied outside of government policy
larp/retard detected

Stop talking about macro as if it is the whole of economics. Macro is at most like 10%.

My whole point was that it's easy to find a job with an economics PhD because there are a whole lot of think tanks who want economists that will produce results that align with their ideology. What are you even trying to argue here?

I made sure to do the BS in economics instead of the BA in economics. The difference was I needed to take Statistics and Econometrics.

Didn't stop me from fulfilling the dream of becoming a NEET.

econ is god-tier, but only if you know what you're doing

anything less than a PhD and noticeable experience and you're boned harder than lesbian dance theory majors

accounting is a safe choice and great money, finance is even better

All economists are specialized in econometrics, otherwise you are not an economist but a meme consultant with a BA in economics. I took 6 econometrics courses, 2 on statistics and 3 mathematics courses during my studies.

Bankers are alpha af.

The problem with Econ is the only viable route is to go to grad school right after your bachelors and then go straight into government work, banks have a few positions.

If you major in finance you can make bank right after undergrad, You dont actually need a CFA to work as an analyst in a tonne of places.

Finance major here. Really dig it, but I've taken intermediate macro/micro as electives because it's interesting. It just grinds my gears how so much of it is based on assumption and kinda falls apart in the real world

What do you call "intermediate macro/micro"?

>Listened to an Economics professor who had just retired give an interview
>He flat out stated that since he was retired he was free to speak freely
>Said anyone majoring in Economics is essentially wasting their time
>Market is already full of people who don't know shit about Economics talking about Economics and people who know Economics also talking about Economics
>You are wasting your time getting into the field now.
>You were wasting your time getting into the field almost 20 years ago
>The schools won't stop you though because they want your money

Who? (((Rubinstein)))?

>It's not really worth it.
probably correct

>about without a Ph.D., and the Ph.D. will likely not be paid for unlike Science or Math Ph.D.'s

Econ departments employ plenty of TAs and RAs. They need them to grade homework, lead recitations, and teach classes. Just like in Math. The RA prospects are probably even better for econ grad students because a researching econ prof is likely to need shitty library work, data collection, organization of experiments, statistical analyses, etc. done by some peon while math professors who are working on research generally know exactly what they're looking at and need to do problem solving, which is an activity that their grad students cannot really help them with. Unless you're dealing with applied math instead of pure where the whole gathering data thing starts to re-emerge, or you happen to be working under someone who uses computer assisted proofs (which is somewhat controversial) and will need help coding the work.

It's just what my college labels it. At this point in "intermediate macroeconomics" we're studying Phillips Curve. Its mostly an expansion upon the intro macroeconomics class I took as a freshman. I'm not sure what other countries use to classify it.

Just because he couldn't understand it and went on to teach it doesn't mean everyone is dumb.

Unless it's from a good school & you plan to get top marks, don't bother

>Is Economics the greatest major ever?

no lmfao

That one is acceptable, but it is one of those very few exceptions out there. And it's still pretty useless unless you're the 1% of people who actually get it. Most people I see just bullshit their way through.

Sorry for going full-on ragefag back there, the anger from seeing so many slide threads is starting to get to me.

>It's just what my college labels it.
Almost every college does the 4 semester intro/intermediate routine as preparation for seminars, although you can place out of the intros sometimes.

It's been a long time but the differences IIRC are
>intro will have non-majors (often business major students)
>intro tends to shy away from computation as it's usually intended for first semester students who might not be able to do calculus yet, intermediate doesn't need to worry because as a 3rd semester course they can reasonably expect everyone to have done calc 1 and 2.
>intro classes will ask test questions that are typically centered around "What is...", intermediate will ask questions that center around "what would happen if..."

>Implying economics makes liberals sad

Dude I went into economics expecting to be made libertarian and left with a BS and even more economically left leaning

Not him but intermediate macro at my UG school covered things like AD/AS in greater depth than intro, IS/LM models, Dynamic AD/AS, Phillips Curve, labor market topics, etc. etc.

Sounds like someone who was past his prime and couldn't keep up with a changing field.