wubbles comments on Earning to Give vs. Altruistic Career Choice Revisited - Less Wrong

34 Post author: JonahSinick 02 June 2013 02:55AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (154)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: wubbles 29 August 2013 01:42:52AM 0 points [-]

By "Wall Street" I'm including the Buy Side as well as the Sell Side. The big buyside firms like Fidelity and Charles Schwab sell products that most people shouldn't buy. Insurance probably has a better case to buy some actively managed products, or some exotic derivatives, but I don't know why it can't do it itself.

To the extent that finance reallocates risk it can provide a positive utility benefit. However, the very productive businesses have questionable utility. Promoting active trading, picking hot funds etc, all eat into the returns clients can expect. Justify the existence of Charles Schwab's S&P 500 index fund, with expense ratio twice that of Vanguards. The most profitable divisions of investment banks tend to be the ones with the least competition, and hence most questionable social benefit.

I'm aware Dodge and Cox is in SF, and Vanguard in Valley Forge, Blackrock in Princeton, etc. However, they are all on "the Street".

The IRS doesn't pay well: for government pay one might as well work for NASA and accomplish something fun.