Per Malthus' suggestion, I require you to explain what getting your accounting degree involves, particularly the math requirements and whether someone whose greatest mathematical accomplishment is comprehending that .9 repeating equals 1 is likely to succeed. Also, please describe to what degree, if any, a legal background may assist in understanding accounting principles and/or working as an accountant, both in terms of acquiring and performing on a job.
I ask out of curiosity about the field. I have no concrete plans.
I should have titled the thread--"HVC--how do you account for yourself?" Oh well.
Now make a thread asking Guller how what he does differs from accounting. :menace:
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:17:59 PM
I should have titled the thread--"HVC--how do you account for yourself?" Oh well.
If it makes you feel any better I read it as 'explain your accounting' as if you were accusing him cooking the books.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 14, 2013, 12:25:31 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:16:40 PM
.9 repeating equals 1
Not true.
There's a difference of .0 repeating... ?
Anyway, just cast it as an integer and there you go.
I am neither HVC nor an accountant, but I've managed accountants.
I'd say a legal background might be helpful, especially if you go into auditing. It certainly will be useful when you start reading tax codes.
The math for accounting is not difficult - it's in fact all arithmetic, unless you're doing analysis too, which may involve either statistics or calculus, depending on what you're looking for. The thing that can make accounting difficult is dealing with multiple revenue streams across several accounts; it can get tricky.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 14, 2013, 12:25:31 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:16:40 PM
.9 repeating equals 1
Not true.
Is true.
Proof:
x = .9 repeating
x(10) = 9.9 repeating
x(10) - x = 9.9 repeating - .9 repeating
x(10) - x = 9
9x = 9
x = 1
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 14, 2013, 12:24:17 PM
Now make a thread asking Guller how what he does differs from accounting. :menace:
What is his actual job? Adjutant? Adjuster? Advertising?
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:31:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 14, 2013, 12:24:17 PM
Now make a thread asking Guller how what he does differs from accounting. :menace:
What is his actual job? Adjutant? Adjuster? Advertising?
He is an actuary, which is totally different than an accountant.
Quote from: fahdiz on February 14, 2013, 12:29:13 PM
I am neither HVC nor an accountant, but I've managed accountants.
I'd say a legal background might be helpful, especially if you go into auditing. It certainly will be useful when you start reading tax codes.
The math for accounting is not difficult - it's in fact all arithmetic, unless you're doing analysis too, which may involve either statistics or calculus, depending on what you're looking for. The thing that can make accounting difficult is dealing with multiple revenue streams across several accounts; it can get tricky.
My understanding is that the math they make you learn for the degree is harder than what you'd be likely to actually use in practice. This is similar (again, to what I've heard) about other fields.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:31:17 PM
What is his actual job? Adjutant? Adjuster? Advertising?
Advertising? Perhaps like Dick Whitman, he's not who he says he is... :hmm:
Quote from: alfred russel on February 14, 2013, 12:33:02 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:31:17 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 14, 2013, 12:24:17 PM
Now make a thread asking Guller how what he does differs from accounting. :menace:
What is his actual job? Adjutant? Adjuster? Advertising?
He is an actuary, which is totally different than an accountant.
I know. :P I was teasing him.
Though it is true I have no idea what an actuary actually does, but I assume it is somehow related to using statistics and mathematical modeling to arrive at business-happy conclusions, as in actuarial tables. But could be way off.
Quote from: fahdiz on February 14, 2013, 12:29:13 PM
I am neither HVC nor an accountant, but I've managed accountants.
I'd say a legal background might be helpful, especially if you go into auditing. It certainly will be useful when you start reading tax codes.
The math for accounting is not difficult - it's in fact all arithmetic, unless you're doing analysis too, which may involve either statistics or calculus, depending on what you're looking for. The thing that can make accounting difficult is dealing with multiple revenue streams across several accounts; it can get tricky.
Oh, also--
Interestingly enough, while trawling the SC gov jerb berd I ran across a "mortgage examiner" position, which required an accounting/finance background although the duties looked almost entirely compliance/quasi-legal, or even legal-legal, in nature. I've reckoned there are probably more positions like that, which combine quasi-legal and accounting functions, and which would make a JD quasi-attractive.
So Ide, accounting doesn't require any advanced math, but it requires mathematical reasoning. If you were a goober in math class, you probably won't be a good accountant, but if you were good at math but just don't remember any, then you are fine.
There are basically 2 career paths you chose in school: tax or audit. Tax deals with tax compliance and planning, audit deals with financial reporting. They are almost separate career paths when you are talking about working for bigger companies and accounting firms (which are generally the people that make $$$).
I know a lot about financial reporting, less about tax. There really won't be much benefit to having a law degree for financial reporting (there could be tangential benefits that you've picked up on, but imo they aren't material). In tax, there are benefits, but then in some cases the jobs CPAs are applying for are also applied to by JDs.
You should really ask DGuller.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:34:23 PM
My understanding is that the math they make you learn for the degree is harder than what you'd be likely to actually use in practice. This is similar (again, to what I've heard) about other fields.
Yep.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:40:43 PM
Oh, also--
Interestingly enough, while trawling the SC gov jerb berd I ran across a "mortgage examiner" position, which required an accounting/finance background although the duties looked almost entirely compliance/quasi-legal, or even legal-legal, in nature. I've reckoned there are probably more positions like that, which combine quasi-legal and accounting functions, and which would make a JD quasi-attractive.
How much does it pay?
Quote from: alfred russel on February 14, 2013, 12:42:34 PM
So Ide, accounting doesn't require any advanced math, but it requires mathematical reasoning. If you were a goober in math class, you probably won't be a good accountant, but if you were good at math but just don't remember any, then you are fine.
There are basically 2 career paths you chose in school: tax or audit. Tax deals with tax compliance and planning, audit deals with financial reporting. They are almost separate career paths when you are talking about working for bigger companies and accounting firms (which are generally the people that make $$$).
I know a lot about financial reporting, less about tax. There really won't be much benefit to having a law degree for financial reporting (there could be tangential benefits that you've picked up on, but imo they aren't material). In tax, there are benefits, but then in some cases the jobs CPAs are applying for are also applied to by JDs.
AR, are you an accountant or allied-type? If so, forgive me for forgetting (see, it pays to bitch and moan constantly about what you do, or don't do--that's how people remember!).
If I were to go into accounting, my goal would be (again) a government job. As I noted in the other thread, it's practically the only thing that would make financial sense--my SL debt is of a size that, barring a job of $60-70k a year or more in an equivalent COL area to Columbia, I'm in IBR till the law permits me to either discharge or receive forgiveness. In the private sector, then, I'm stuck for 25 years, and would then be permitted a discharge, the remaining balance of which would be treated as income (see, I know tax already :) ), which would probably not be satisfied but would be prevented from wiping me out based on the insolvency limit. In the public sector, either as gov't employee or non-profit employee, Public Service Loan Forgiveness kicks in and after 10 years I am free and clear and the forgiveness is not treated as income (rad, huh?). This shockingly generous program is probably half the reason every govjob in America is swarmed with applicants (the other half being the apocalyptic ordinary economy), inasmuch as for me it would amount to untaxed extra compensation in excess of $10,000 a year. (For a bachelorette with the average bachelor debt, though, it may be a wash. I'd have to run those numbers.)
Also, of course, I'd rather work for the state than private business, all things being equal, anyway.
I imagine the IRS, SEC and other agencies employ both tax and audit people.
QuoteHow much does it pay?
$31,000-38,000 is the agency range. Wow, that's garbage considering I get paid substantially more than the maximum (albeit at 50 hours a week) to click buttons largely based on color coding and drawing boxes over confidential information,* whereas this is a pretty technical, "real" job. (I hate the way SCGov lists their salaries--there's the "state salary range," which is what gets posted on the main board, and this is $31,000 up to $57,000; but there is also the "agency hiring range," which you can miss before investing time in applying, and which is often seriously low in comparison to both the advertised range and what you'd expect the job to pay).
*However, you'd be amazed how many people fail to do this correctly. I was when I started QCing, and especially when I started QCing QCers.)
Ide, I'm not technically an accountant, but I work with it enough I can be considered one.
A few thoughts:
--if your legal situation may be keeping you from getting into the bar, it may also keep you from being a CPA.
--I can't speak to government jobs at all, however, that is absurdly low pay by private industry standards, even for a brand new grad. I don't know how much debt you have, but I suspect you would easily be able to service the loans with the difference.
--You might want to move to a big city. Mom and pop accounting doesn't pay like big companies do, and big companies are in places like Charlotte and Atlanta, not South Carolina.
--I wouldn't count on any benefit to a JD applying to an entry level accounting job. The reality is that most entry level jobs are designed to be doing basic work that is heavily supervised. An entry level accounting job probably won't have a place for innovative JD thinking, and probably won't be supervised by someone who could take advantage of that anyway.
--If you are concerned about working 50 hours per week, accounting may not be for you.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:16:40 PM
Also, please describe to what degree, if any, a legal background may assist in understanding accounting principles and/or working as an accountant, both in terms of acquiring and performing on a job.
Other way around. Knowledge of accounting is a critical skill for any commercial attorney. One of the most common deficiencies in associate skills.
Which is why you should have already taken at least one class in law school . . . ;)
As described, conventional debt service is only part of the analysis in a public sector job, or even a private sector job.
It struck me as wackily low. Admin assistants make within spitting distance of that. Hell, WAITERS make within spitting distance of that.
Charlotte or Atlanta wouldn't be out of the question.
I have no concerns about working 50 hours a week, I've worked somewhat more than that on average for a year (not counting the past month, when I've been studying for the bar... and honestly I should have started earlier, but between the uncertainty of getting to sit and money, I stayed working as long as I reasonably or even unreasonably could).
As for the record thing, yeah, trying to educate my way out of my criminal record has not been largely successful so far. My last job application included a plea along the lines of "FUCK'S SAKE, IT WAS ELEVEN YEARS AGO"--figured it couldn't hurt.
A JD need not be an advantage, I was just curious. Indeed, I've considered leaving the JD off of applications and just formally referring to my work "diligence" or "document review." Also,
Quoteinnovative JD thinking
Lollercopter, Inc. But you're sweet. :hug:
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on February 14, 2013, 01:51:28 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:16:40 PM
Also, please describe to what degree, if any, a legal background may assist in understanding accounting principles and/or working as an accountant, both in terms of acquiring and performing on a job.
Other way around. Knowledge of accounting is a critical skill for any commercial attorney. One of the most common deficiencies in associate skills.
Which is why you should have already taken at least one class in law school . . . ;)
I took income taxation, if that's what you mean. Other than the professor who was a total cunt about his own idiosyncratic view of how time worked (I was once yelled at and thrown out for showing up two minutes... early) but was otherwise a decent dude, as far as law professors go (i.e., higher than sulfur bacteria, lower than algae), I enjoyed it and did above the curve. I really ought to have focused on that instead of criminal law, given that criminals make bad clients (surpise!).
Income taxation really has little to do with financial accounting.
Quote from: alfred russel on February 14, 2013, 02:11:33 PM
Income taxation really has little to do with financial accounting.
I bet it has something to do with tax compliance and planning. :P
1 / 3 = 0.333...
1/3 x 3 = 0.999...
So 0.999... = 1.
I stand corrected. :)
Quote from: alfred russel on February 14, 2013, 01:35:14 PM
--I can't speak to government jobs at all, however, that is absurdly low pay by private industry standards, even for a brand new grad.
Typically, public sector jobs offer lower pay than comparable private sector jobs, but better benefits.
I think I posted this before, but my old gf SocialWorkerGirl, after getting her degree, took a job as a cashier in a discount store while seeking a job with the state Department of Human Services. When she got hired by them, she actually took a pay cut from her cashier job. Keep in mind that her job in CPS required not only a degree in social work, but that she be licensed and bonded.
Quote--You might want to move to a big city. Mom and pop accounting doesn't pay like big companies do, and big companies are in places like Charlotte and Atlanta, not South Carolina.
In almost any field, the best-paying jobs are in the big cities. Of course, the cost of living tends to be higher there as well.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:16:40 PM
Per Malthus' suggestion, I require you to explain what getting your accounting degree involves, particularly the math requirements and whether someone whose greatest mathematical accomplishment is comprehending that .9 repeating equals 1 is likely to succeed. Also, please describe to what degree, if any, a legal background may assist in understanding accounting principles and/or working as an accountant, both in terms of acquiring and performing on a job.
I ask out of curiosity about the field. I have no concrete plans.
Accounting is part of a business admin course. Most universities will require Differential and Integral calculus, but some won't.
Anyway, they have no use in accounting.
A legal background may assist in that, you are accustomed to reading walls of texts and memorizing them, wich is still the way accounting is taught in some schools, where like fiscality, you need to justifiy every decision made with the proper articles of law/accounting principle.
But mainly, what is required are analytical capabilities (and a good understanding of Excel ;) ). You need to know wich principle to use under what circumstances. What is the effect of choosing a method over another. Will using LIFO result in a smaller profit than using FIFO, what's the effect on your quick ratio when your receivables increase, etc, etc,.
It's not that hard to remember after 3 years doing the same stuff.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:35:59 PM
Though it is true I have no idea what an actuary actually does, but I assume it is somehow related to using statistics and mathematical modeling to arrive at business-happy conclusions, as in actuarial tables. But could be way off.
It's mainly quantifying risks.
Heh, whenever I see one of Ide's threads, it always reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwI2DTiVSJ0
;)
Quote from: viper37 on February 14, 2013, 02:50:22 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 12:35:59 PM
Though it is true I have no idea what an actuary actually does, but I assume it is somehow related to using statistics and mathematical modeling to arrive at business-happy conclusions, as in actuarial tables. But could be way off.
It's mainly quantifying risks.
There are many things that actuaries do, depending on their responsibilities. Some of them do involve accounting, because you have to prepare financial statements for regulators. However, most of it has to do with pricing one kind of insurance risk or another. My job involves calculating the appropriate premiums for insurance, as well as determining to relative risk level of policyholders with different characteristics, and involves no accounting at all. In fact, I personally detest accounting, and find it mind-numbing.
Quote from: Malthus on February 14, 2013, 05:42:36 PM
Heh, whenever I see one of Ide's threads, it always reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwI2DTiVSJ0
;)
:lol:
I was going to object, till they pulled an Inception and revealed that Joe Dog's copious actual interviews were all a dream, and that jobs are likeliest to come from personal contacts, particularly family networks, rather than any real effort put in by the job seeker. This educational short is too educational. :(
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 08:18:51 PM
Quote from: Malthus on February 14, 2013, 05:42:36 PM
Heh, whenever I see one of Ide's threads, it always reminds me of this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwI2DTiVSJ0
;)
:lol:
I was going to object, till they pulled an Inception and revealed that Joe Dog's copious actual interviews were all a dream, and that jobs are likeliest to come from personal contacts, particularly family networks, rather than any real effort put in by the job seeker. This educational short is too educational. :(
It always freaks me out that this was produced as a PSA. What, exactly, where they thinking one wonders? :lol:
I get a thread especially for me, and I miss it :lol:
I am neither a tax accountant nor an auditor. Although I guess I could be, once I get my designation, but in Canada most people look for auditors who are Chartered Accountants and I'm going for my Certified General Accountant designation. Not sure about America, but in Canada there are three designations you can achieve. CA>CGA>CMA (Certified Managerial Accountant). Don't want to do auditing so I'm fine with my second tier designation :P . Besides, they keep trying to merge CA's and CGA's so who knows, one day I may be a CA. As mentioned previously there are some legal requirements to becoming a designated accountant so you should probably look into that.
Myself, I'm a cost accountant, not really by planning, but we'll get to that later. Cost accounting basically entails making sure manufacturing costs are captured and accounted for at its basic level. At my current job that means a lot of analysis. A lot. Along with that analysis means correcting transactions (uhm, basically booking journal entries for costs not recorded through error of some kind). That's my day to day function besides the analysis. I also provide assistance to colleagues because even though I've only been here like five months I somehow know the system better then sales and marketing. Go figure. I also do month end duties like clearing up variances to their respective accounts and management reports (again, analysis :P ). Unless you want my whole CV that's the basics of what I do :D.
Depending on what type of accounting you do your duties vary. I find AP accountants have the most boring jobs. You basically just record invoices all day. So, data entry. The higher up you go the more varied your task. Like a controller, who basically overlooks the whole accounting duties for their division or company. What I've found from myself and school friends is that your first job basically dictates what you'll do for your career until you get high enough and can back track into another area. My first job was plant accountant (basically rookie cost accountant in manufacturing) so basically I'm in a manufacturing field, most likely costing, until I get higher up (probably manager or if I wait long enough controller in a manufacturing environment) and then I can go somewhere else if I want. So if you do go accounting pick your first job wisely. It's not so much that skills aren't transferable, booking journal entries is booking journal entries, it's just that companies want people who are familiar with certain environments.
Also, you will be working long hours, not matter what type of accountant you are. Month end has to get done, whether you work for a giant public company or tiny private one. You'll be salary so chances are you won't get over time.
Anyway, that's longer then I expected, but that's basically what I do lol
oh ya, and at least here to get your designation (depending on which one you get it's a little different) you need to work and go to school at teh same time and reach a certain amount of field related hours before you get your letters.
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 10:01:30 AM
I am neither a tax accountant nor an auditor. Although I guess I could be, once I get my designation, but in Canada most people look for auditors who are Chartered Accountants and I’m going for my Certified General Accountant designation.
Another fun ex-gf story, this one involving CollegeGirlFriend. One time, she told me that she had applied for a position as Chief Auditor at a fairly large manufactuing concern, but hadn't gotten the job. She said, "I'm not even sure what an auditor does. Do you think that might be why I didn't get it?"
I was kind of stunned by that, but my reply was, "Well, that might be part of it, but I'd think that for a position with that title, they'd want someone with an accounting degree and a good bit of experience." And then she said, "Well, that's not what they said in the job listing" and showed me the help wanted ad they had put out. The job requirements they listed? Have a high school diploma and no felony convictions. I was like, WTF? Heck, I've seen help wanted ads for janitors that had higher requirements than that.
Just noticed i didn't actually answer the question lol (my defense is a just woke up :P ).
To get a designation here depends on what type you get (CA, CGA, CMA), not too familiar with the others so I'll focus on CGA. You need a university degree for all three of them. Better to get an accounting related one because then you get exemptions, if not you'll be taking a lot of accounting courses through the CGA program. Besides your university degree you'll have to take specific courses and or tests for your designation. The more exemptions you have the less of these you have to do. Math is almost not required, really. Can you add and subtract? You're hired. If you get more into the analysis field then you'll need more, but that's work related, for the designation itself if you can do (1+1)/2=x you're golden. In your work life itself you will need excel. It makes things so much easier. Vlookups and pivot tables are the minimum level you need. Having an understanding of the function (or at least the easy function guide :P) is a requirement for you career, but not your designation.
Like I mentioned above you'll also need work related experience which means work plus school at the same time, which is a drag. And even once you get your designation you'll have to keep taking classes and or seminars to meet hour requirements to keep your designation.
Your law degree wouldn't really help per se, except meeting the university degree requirement, but if you go into a compliance/audit field it would help because of constantly changing rules and your knowledge of reading complicated legalize and knowing what the fuck it's saying. Would it help you get a job? Not really, no. At least not when you start. Maybe later on in your career. But even at the start you might have to explain why you jumped career paths without getting snarky :D
So, ya, this is for canada so may not apply to you :D
You don't smile that much in RL, HVC.
Quote from: Grey Fox on February 15, 2013, 10:36:43 AM
You don't smile that much in RL, HVC.
I really do... :D
Hillary's life is filled with hilarity. :)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 15, 2013, 10:39:30 AM
Hillary's life is filled with hilarity. :)
Personally, I think an insurance actuarial life would be more jolly.
Nothing causes more yuks than working out the odds of all around you being injured or killed. :D
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 10:01:30 AM
Besides, they keep trying to merge CA's and CGA's so who knows, one day I may be a CA. As mentioned previously there are some legal requirements to becoming a designated accountant so you should probably look into that.
The merger is complete in Quebec, I thought we were the last, but for once, we are 1st :)
http://cpacanada.ca/
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 10:27:02 AM
To get a designation here depends on what type you get (CA, CGA, CMA), not too familiar with the others so I'll focus on CGA.
it's really the same process, except the classes at universities may change. CA &CGA gets more auditing classes than the CMA. CA gets more fiscality classes than CGA. CMA gets more management-accounting classes.
Basically, the way it works in Canada is that CGA is the most popular title in government offices.
CA is the most popular title for auditing.
CMA is the most popular title for work in manufacturing corporations.
Neither is exclusive. Except maybe auditing where it depends on provincial legislation.
Quote from: Malthus on February 15, 2013, 10:54:18 AM
Personally, I think an insurance actuarial life would be more jolly.
They got the best of finance: exciting carreer, huge pay.
Also, nobody blames them when they fuck up, and there's no movement to kill actuaries, they always blame the finance guys.
So yeah, it's a dream job, really. :P
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 15, 2013, 10:39:30 AM
Hillary's life is filled with hilarity. :)
That's part of it... the other part is that my default relaxed expression comes across as saying "if you talk to me i may or may not punch you in the face" :D. Not exactly what makes ladies swoon (well, maybe the ones with really bad daddy issues). So i compensate with smiling a lot.
Viper: Ya, they've been trying to merge for years. Not sure how that will work because as far as i know, at least in Ontario, CMA's take no audit courses at all. But then again i guess audit is something you learn on the job.
Quote from: viper37 on February 15, 2013, 11:17:24 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 15, 2013, 10:54:18 AM
Personally, I think an insurance actuarial life would be more jolly.
They got the best of finance: exciting carreer, huge pay.
Also, nobody blames them when they fuck up, and there's no movement to kill actuaries, they always blame the finance guys.
So yeah, it's a dream job, really. :P
:wacko:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on February 15, 2013, 01:14:31 PM
Quote from: viper37 on February 15, 2013, 11:17:24 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 15, 2013, 10:54:18 AM
Personally, I think an insurance actuarial life would be more jolly.
They got the best of finance: exciting carreer, huge pay.
Also, nobody blames them when they fuck up, and there's no movement to kill actuaries, they always blame the finance guys.
So yeah, it's a dream job, really. :P
:wacko:
must mean something different in french :P
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 02:06:18 PM
I took income taxation, if that's what you mean.
I meant "Accounting for Lawyers" or somesuch.
"Don't steal from your trust account" X 100? :P
No, I didn't take that. Not totally sure USC offered it, but they certainly may have.
IDE just emigrate and then tell the US 'authorities' where to stick it. :bowler:
Quote from: Ideologue on February 14, 2013, 02:12:28 PM
Quote from: alfred russel on February 14, 2013, 02:11:33 PM
Income taxation really has little to do with financial accounting.
I bet it has something to do with tax compliance and planning. :P
Yeah, but you seem to be at zero when it comes to basic accounting. Unless things have changed in the past few years, your 101 and 102 college classes will be in financial accounting and management accounting. The basic tax classes for aspiring accountants are going to build off of those: so you probably have a good bit of advanced knowledge that would be an advantage down the road in a subset of the field, but not at the start.
Quote from: viper37 on February 15, 2013, 11:17:24 AM
Quote from: Malthus on February 15, 2013, 10:54:18 AM
Personally, I think an insurance actuarial life would be more jolly.
They got the best of finance: exciting carreer, huge pay.
Also, nobody blames them when they fuck up, and there's no movement to kill actuaries, they always blame the finance guys.
So yeah, it's a dream job, really. :P
A major liability for many companies is the pension liability, which must be determined by actuaries. Typically the actuary is sent the company's employee demographic and compensation data, does a bunch of analysis, and sends the company the results. Our auditors were reviewing the process as best they can, which meant testing that the data the actuaries were sent was accurate (without hiring a second actuary, there isn't a way to test the actual calculation).
So the auditor didn't want to test every piece of data we sent, because we sent a lot of information, so he got the actuary on the phone to explain which data was actually critical to the calculation. And when he did, the auditor realized that the actuary didn't understand the information he was sent. To make a long story short, a field heading had a cryptic explanation and the actuary assumed it didn't include certain types of compensation when it did. Rather than asking a question of what something meant, the actuary just guessed, and produced a small novel of analysis that was thus worthless. Had the auditor not caught the error, our liability would have been overstated by over a hundred million dollars.
Actuaries. :wacko:
Accountants should clearly document their shit. :wacko:
Quote from: DGuller on February 15, 2013, 08:40:57 PM
Accountants should clearly document their shit. :wacko:
you're the alchemists of the financial field.
Also, screw you Ide :P
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 08:41:54 PM
Quote from: DGuller on February 15, 2013, 08:40:57 PM
Accountants should clearly document their shit. :wacko:
you're the alchamists of the finacial feild.
Also, screw you Ide :P
You're thinking of investment bankers. We, or at least our pension brethren, just assume that fixed income investments would yield 8.5% return in perpetuity.
Quote from: DGuller on February 15, 2013, 08:42:59 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 08:41:54 PM
Quote from: DGuller on February 15, 2013, 08:40:57 PM
Accountants should clearly document their shit. :wacko:
you're the alchamists of the finacial feild.
Also, screw you Ide :P
You're thinking of investment bankers. We, or at least our pension brethren, just assume that fixed income investments would yield 8.5% return in perpetuity.
ya, like the return is realistic :D
Yeah, but then on the flip side they discount liabilities, some of which won't be paid for 60+ years, at 4%.
Quote from: mongers on February 15, 2013, 06:44:51 PM
IDE just emigrate and then tell the US 'authorities' where to stick it. :bowler:
Ide's main problem is finding a job in the legal field, not sure how moving to a country with a significantly different legal system than the one his education was supposed to prepare him for would help.
Quote from: dps on February 15, 2013, 10:32:44 PM
Quote from: mongers on February 15, 2013, 06:44:51 PM
IDE just emigrate and then tell the US 'authorities' where to stick it. :bowler:
Ide's main problem is finding a job in the legal field, not sure how moving to a country with a significantly different legal system than the one his education was supposed to prepare him for would help.
I'm sugesting he get out of lawyering as well as getting out of dodge. :)
Quote from: mongers on February 15, 2013, 10:50:47 PM
Quote from: dps on February 15, 2013, 10:32:44 PM
Quote from: mongers on February 15, 2013, 06:44:51 PM
IDE just emigrate and then tell the US 'authorities' where to stick it. :bowler:
Ide's main problem is finding a job in the legal field, not sure how moving to a country with a significantly different legal system than the one his education was supposed to prepare him for would help.
I'm sugesting he get out of lawyering as well as getting out of dodge. :)
Well, effectively, he is out of lawyering, what with not being able to find a job in the field. The thing is, he wants a job in the field. Your advice is akin to telling a guy who can't get laid to consider a celibate lifestyle--it's already the lifestyle he has, and he don't wan't it.
Quote from: dps on February 15, 2013, 11:10:17 PM
Well, effectively, he is out of lawyering, what with not being able to find a job in the field. The thing is, he wants a job in the field. Your advice is akin to telling a guy who can't get laid to consider a celibate lifestyle--it's already the lifestyle he has, and he don't wan't it.
Actually, I'm surprised he has the job he has without being a member of a state bar. Congrats, Ide!
Quote from: HVC on February 15, 2013, 08:41:54 PM
Quote from: DGuller on February 15, 2013, 08:40:57 PM
Accountants should clearly document their shit. :wacko:
you're the alchemists of the financial field.
Also, screw you Ide :P
I read what you said, and I appreciated you taking the time to write it. :) Sorry, I got distracted with some other stuff.
The math requirement is interesting. (As is, in the opposite direction, Excel competency. I'm not very good with Excel. :( But it's just a piece of software, and hence should be easily learned... then again, I never figured out vector programs. : / )
Quote from: ulmont on February 15, 2013, 11:24:53 PM
Quote from: dps on February 15, 2013, 11:10:17 PM
Well, effectively, he is out of lawyering, what with not being able to find a job in the field. The thing is, he wants a job in the field. Your advice is akin to telling a guy who can't get laid to consider a celibate lifestyle--it's already the lifestyle he has, and he don't wan't it.
Actually, I'm surprised he has the job he has without being a member of a state bar. Congrats, Ide!
:)
Indeed, I'm actually paid about 10% more than most of the people who've worked there. (And even though I'm paid less than what someone in a major market would be comfortable imagining, by PPP I probably make more than your average NYC doc reviewer. This is in part why NYC and other major market doc review is dying--domestic competition. Not just here, but I've also heard of a giant facility in the hills of West Virginia.) Like the Indian shops before us, we are fluent in English (sometimes equally so!) and cheap.
I have wondered if I'm billed the same as the licensed attorneys. I guess that's probably kosher. Nothing requires the firm to bill me differently, just like a law license is not required to do document review (which is why foreigners in actual foreign countries can do it). FLSA applicability is a different story, and coworkers who got staffed through a competing agency are limited to 40 hours a week if unlicensed, whereas I could work 70 if I feel like it (and no, I have NOT ever felt like it). There's colorable arguments either way on that, and it's a possible revenue stream if I ever wanted to burn my bridge and piss on the ashes. :P
Anyway, the fact that they were sucking the market here dry surely helped in getting me the position--I was deferred for a month, until they realized they needed like 100 more people than they actually had.
Future access to doc review is the number one reason I'm taking the bar exam in a couple of weeks (well, ten days :( ). It's a preposterous world--I need to take an exam that has nothing to do with the job I'm seeking, to prove I can do the job I've been doing for a year. :rolleyes:
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:58:31 PM
Indeed, I'm actually paid about 10% more than most of the people who've worked there. (And even though I'm paid less than what someone in a major market would be comfortable imagining, by PPP I probably make more than your average NYC doc reviewer. This is in part why NYC and other major market doc review is dying--domestic competition. Not just here, but I've also heard of a giant facility in the hills of West Virginia.) Like the Indian shops before us, we are fluent in English (sometimes equally so!) and cheap.
I am aware of certain clients - let's call them "repeat players" - who have centralized all first level document review with certain (lower cost) firms. All the outside counsel hired for any particular case can do is QC. Good luck for the outside counsel figuring out what the fuck is going on with the case or prepping for depositions or similar.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:58:31 PM
Future access to doc review is the number one reason I'm taking the bar exam in a couple of weeks (well, ten days :( ). It's a preposterous world--I need to take an exam that has nothing to do with the job I'm seeking, to prove I can do the job I've been doing for a year. :rolleyes:
Eh. At least you have a closed shop union willing to protect you to a certain extent.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:58:31 PM
It's a preposterous world--I need to take an exam that has nothing to do with the job I'm seeking, to prove I can do the job I've been doing for a year. :rolleyes:
:( :yes: I know how that feels.
Quote from: DGuller on February 16, 2013, 01:58:19 AM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:58:31 PM
It's a preposterous world--I need to take an exam that has nothing to do with the job I'm seeking, to prove I can do the job I've been doing for a year. :rolleyes:
:( :yes: I know how that feels.
Yeah, I've never really had to do anything like that, but it's certainly not limited to the legal field.
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:32:17 PM
The math requirement is interesting. (As is, in the opposite direction, Excel competency. I'm not very good with Excel. :( But it's just a piece of software, and hence should be easily learned... then again, I never figured out vector programs. : / )
You can become very competent in Excel without a lot of effort. That's the secret of Excel - it scares the shit out of people, but it's really not all that bad to learn, and once you start doing even rudimentary data analysis and charts in Excel a lot of folks treat you like you're some sort of oracle.
Quote from: fahdiz on February 16, 2013, 04:38:29 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:32:17 PM
The math requirement is interesting. (As is, in the opposite direction, Excel competency. I'm not very good with Excel. :( But it's just a piece of software, and hence should be easily learned... then again, I never figured out vector programs. : / )
You can become very competent in Excel without a lot of effort. That's the secret of Excel - it scares the shit out of people, but it's really not all that bad to learn, and once you start doing even rudimentary data analysis and charts in Excel a lot of folks treat you like you're some sort of oracle.
This is very true. I remember I was a Lotus 123 'guru' in its early days, computer data/numbery stuff impresses people.
What Heterodiz said.
Quote from: fahdiz on February 16, 2013, 04:38:29 PM
Quote from: Ideologue on February 15, 2013, 11:32:17 PM
The math requirement is interesting. (As is, in the opposite direction, Excel competency. I'm not very good with Excel. :( But it's just a piece of software, and hence should be easily learned... then again, I never figured out vector programs. : / )
You can become very competent in Excel without a lot of effort. That's the secret of Excel - it scares the shit out of people, but it's really not all that bad to learn, and once you start doing even rudimentary data analysis and charts in Excel a lot of folks treat you like you're some sort of oracle.
Excel is like Texas Holdem. It takes a day to learn, it takes a lifetime to master. I'm still learning new things, after 8 years of using it extensively at work.
Quote from: DGuller on February 16, 2013, 04:53:53 PM
Excel is like Texas Holdem. It takes a day to learn, it takes a lifetime to master. I'm still learning new things, after 8 years of using it extensively at work.
Yes indeed. Few other readily-available pieces of software offer such opportunity for continuous learning.
I made a chart for my girlfriend's organic chemistry class plotting four experiment groups over a period of time. It took me 30 seconds to enter the data and probably 4 minutes to turn it into a color-coded chart with legend, etc. When she brought the final writeup to class she had no fewer than 5 classmates want to use the chart instead of their own, EVEN THOUGH THE DATA WASN'T THE SAME, showing her their hand-drawn monstrosities with pitiful, ashamed looks.
I was dumbfounded. It is amazing how terrified most people are of spreadsheets.
Organic chemistry? What is she like 20 years old?
If so, nice going Fahdiz. :cheers:
Excel is pretty easy, and even if you don't know how to do something it's usually simple to google .
Quote from: fahdiz on February 16, 2013, 07:03:42 PM
I made a chart for my girlfriend's organic chemistry class plotting four experiment groups over a period of time. It took me 30 seconds to enter the data and probably 4 minutes to turn it into a color-coded chart with legend, etc. When she brought the final writeup to class she had no fewer than 5 classmates want to use the chart instead of their own, EVEN THOUGH THE DATA WASN'T THE SAME, showing her their hand-drawn monstrosities with pitiful, ashamed looks.
I was dumbfounded. It is amazing how terrified most people are of spreadsheets.
This was in the 90s surely? That is rather amazingly terrible.
Quote from: Fate on February 17, 2013, 12:00:38 AM
Organic chemistry? What is she like 20 years old?
No, she's going into nursing school and had to do some prerequisite classes.
Most of the people in the class, to be fair, were probably "like 20 years old".
Quote from: Tyr on February 17, 2013, 12:26:12 AM
This was in the 90s surely? That is rather amazingly terrible.
I wish. It was last year.
Quote from: fahdiz on February 18, 2013, 11:57:21 AM
No, she's going into nursing school and had to do some prerequisite classes.
Most of the people in the class, to be fair, were probably "like 20 years old".
Study group at your place. :perv:
Quote from: Admiral Yi on February 18, 2013, 12:31:47 PM
Study group at your place. :perv:
:D
With stress-releasing pillow fights, of course.
Given my skill set, maybe I should have been an accountant. :hmm:
And then I could have got to watch a little bit more of me inside, die each day. :cool:
Quote from: fahdiz on February 18, 2013, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: Tyr on February 17, 2013, 12:26:12 AM
This was in the 90s surely? That is rather amazingly terrible.
I wish. It was last year.
:bleeding:
Suddenly I feel somewhat better about my employment prospects :hmm:
Quote from: Tyr on February 18, 2013, 06:59:24 PM
Quote from: fahdiz on February 18, 2013, 11:57:58 AM
Quote from: Tyr on February 17, 2013, 12:26:12 AM
This was in the 90s surely? That is rather amazingly terrible.
I wish. It was last year.
:bleeding:
Suddenly I feel somewhat better about my employment prospects :hmm:
don't be. every job requires it, no one checks it lol
Quote from: HVC on February 18, 2013, 07:13:42 PM
don't be. every job requires it, no one checks it lol
Aaaaaaand I'm right back to suicide again :p
Quote from: Tyr on February 18, 2013, 07:18:02 PM
Quote from: HVC on February 18, 2013, 07:13:42 PM
don't be. every job requires it, no one checks it lol
Aaaaaaand I'm right back to suicide again :p
it's still a good skill to have so when you have the job you won't get fired lol