Education versus money

I agree absolutely NotSpaghetti and Doodledog.

M0nica

Also Newcastle, Duham and most of the Russell Group universities. Remember Economics degrees usually include the full range of finance and accounting.

No, they don't.

growstuff, Oxford, Cambridge and the LSE all offer A&F courses. My son considered all of them and opted for the LSE. And graduated with a First.

M0nica

growstuff but they both have highly regarded business schools

Accounting is just a fancy word for book keeping and can be learnt at any further education college. Accountancy is a much wider subject that covers finance and economics. In the same way that you cannot study economics without studying finance and business.

The overlap between economics and finance is enormous, many years ago I obtained a degree in economics, the overlap was sufficient for me to have the shortest in-work training period and exampted me from all but the final exams of the Institute of Chartered Accountants.

Monica, I assure you that the accounting element in the A&F degree course which my son took was far from a fancy name for bookkeeping.

My siblings and I all had similar educational opportunities. I was the least academic and arguably the most arty and practical.
Both earn or did earn a great deal more than me and occasionally I have pangs of envy especially when their DC need financial assistance and they don't hesitate to help whereas my 4 have had to stand on their own feet.

Now though, in my old age, I have my pottery studio. I'll never retire completely unless I want to. I teach a little still and am never bored.
As others have said, money is not everything though it does help to cushion life's blows.

Germanshepherdsmum

*growstuff*, Oxford, Cambridge and the LSE all offer A&F courses. My son considered all of them and opted for the LSE. And graduated with a First.

Can you provide a link to an undergraduate course in finance or accounting from Oxford or Cambridge? I know they offer postgraduate courses and LSE has a course. Economics is not the same as accounting, although both involve a lot of number crunching.

However, my friend applied for university the same year as I did (1973). There was a much narrower range of courses from the top unis then and, anyway, she wanted to be a lawyer when she was 18. She was my flatmate at uni and she still wanted to be a lawyer while she was still studying law. It wasn't wasted time because she was able to combine skills learnt studying law with detailed knowledge of accounting procedures learnt on the job and through study.

That sounds great Gramaretto. I wish I had a talent for something arty.

I have a hobby too, based on an interest I've always had. I run an online group and a blog. I also organise online seminars with some of the world's leaders in a fairly niche field as guest speakers. I normally have about 100 participants. I don't get paid for any of it, but love doing it.

I have just about enough money to survive fairly frugally and a wonderful partner and two amazing children. I have various health niggles, but I couldn't be happier and feel more positive and fulfilled in the last years of my life than I have ever done. I actually think that the person who told me I'd never lose my education was right.

This is the BSc course my son took at LSE
www.lse.ac.uk/study-at-lse/undergraduate/degree-programmes-2024/bsc-accounting-and-finance

I know there's an undergraduate course at LSE, but what about Oxford and Cambridge?

I think the A&F degree at Oxford is now offered at their Said Business School, which wasn’t the case when my son was considering applying.

And I know personally graduates in those subjects, they were accepted with minimal qualifications and have never done anything other than low wage jobs
Bums on seats

GSM the difference is between accounting and accountancy. I think what your son studied was probably accountancy, which may have included the basics of accounting.

Katie59

And I know personally graduates in those subjects, they were accepted with minimal qualifications and have never done anything other than low wage jobs
Bums on seats

Response to Growstuff 8.49

The title of his course was Accounting (not Accountancy) and Finance. He had no intention of becoming an accountant. His initial intention was to go into investment banking but he decided to become a finance lawyer instead. A degree which was relevant to more than one well paid career path.

There are a lot of women working in finance accounting and administration, perhaps a majority these days. If that’s the kind of employment a student wants, a degree in Business Administration would be a good choice to ensure employability . That can be utilized all the way from self employed to the top of an international company.

Katie59

NotSpaghetti

Germanshepherdsmum

Some degrees are a waste of the students’ time and money.

Which ones?

Those with a very loose course content, low entry qualification and no career path following. Media studies, Art, Drama, Fashion, Animal Care, many more, you are highly unlikely to get graduate work in any of those. Art in particular you need talent which you won’t learn at university, avoiding starvation will be a challenge.

Do you have a shred of evidence for this?

And even though, as I said upthread, even the most successful artists, novelists or dramatists are unlikely to make it to the top within the 18 months before their courses are written off as poor value, and not everyone sees money as more important than job satisfaction. Plus, rightly or wrongly, there are numerous graduate entry routes into good careers that don't specify a subject (civil service being the first to spring to mind, but including teaching, various management schemes and so on).

Further, many 'traditional' degrees have 'loose course content and no career path', (English, Maths, History, Modern Languages, Art History etc etc) but are taught at prestigious universities. 'Graduate work' in these areas is thin on the ground, yes - but having a degree in them is not a waste of time or money.

Katie59

And I know personally graduates in those subjects, they were accepted with minimal qualifications and have never done anything other than low wage jobs
Bums on seats

I'm sure we all know people who have done little with their talents, as well as those who have risen to the top from an inauspicious start. Neither proves a thing.

I honestly have no idea which metrics could usefully be used to measure how far other people have wasted their time and money. They don't all start from the same point, so benchmarks are difficult, and whether the cost was worth it or not depends on what they get out of the course.

For what anecdotes are worth, I know someone with an MA in Creative Writing. It cost a lot and she hasn't made a penny from it, but she loved doing it and uses the skills she gained to enhance her spare time, running classes and attending workshops etc. Who can tell her that it was a waste of time or money? That's for her to decide, surely?

That’s fine if she, rather than the taxpayer, funded her course Doodledog. Now that the taxpayer funds a degree course in the expectation of repayment, is it unreasonable to say that people studying subjects which are unlikely to lead to a job which will enable them to repay their loans are wasting taxpayers’ money?

Absolutely agree with GSD. The government shouldn’t be funding education to a level that doesn’t provide a return the state rather than the individual. I would love to see from the age of 16 more vocational options being considered and
less emphasis on university being the be all and end all.

Germanshepherdsmum

That’s fine if she, rather than the taxpayer, funded her course Doodledog. Now that the taxpayer funds a degree course in the expectation of repayment, is it unreasonable to say that people studying subjects which are unlikely to lead to a job which will enable them to repay their loans are wasting taxpayers’ money?

Now the repayment terms have been changed, the vast majority of student loans will be repaid at some point.

Doodledog

Katie59

And I know personally graduates in those subjects, they were accepted with minimal qualifications and have never done anything other than low wage jobs
Bums on seats

I'm sure we all know people who have done little with their talents, as well as those who have risen to the top from an inauspicious start. Neither proves a thing.

I honestly have no idea which metrics could usefully be used to measure how far other people have wasted their time and money. They don't all start from the same point, so benchmarks are difficult, and whether the cost was worth it or not depends on what they get out of the course.

For what anecdotes are worth, I know someone with an MA in Creative Writing. It cost a lot and she hasn't made a penny from it, but she loved doing it and uses the skills she gained to enhance her spare time, running classes and attending workshops etc. Who can tell her that it was a waste of time or money? That's for her to decide, surely?

The return on education can't and shouldn't always be measured in financial terms. Learning is part of being human and I would argue that humanity itself develops as a result of communal and widespread learning.

Plus, rightly or wrongly, there are numerous graduate entry routes into good careers that don't specify a subject (civil service being the first to spring to mind, but including teaching, various management schemes and so on).

Doodledog Exactly! My daughter has a degree in history and economics and an MA in history, even though she knew it would never lead to making loads of money. She never wanted to study anything else. She got a Civil Service Fast Stream place and is now an HR manager and is making loads of money.

Hear Hear, growstuff. In response to the original question, quite possibly not.
However, there's more to life than how much money you make, and there's more to a healthy society than just it's GDP, surely?

Germanshepherdsmum

The title of his course was Accounting (not Accountancy) and Finance. He had no intention of becoming an accountant. His initial intention was to go into investment banking but he decided to become a finance lawyer instead. A degree which was relevant to more than one well paid career path.

I know LSE runs such a course at undergraduate level. Oxford doesn't. Its finance and business courses are at postgraduate level and were set up relatively recently (over the last 40 or so years) in response to the increasing number of MBAs in the US.

And it’s fine by you for that to be funded by the taxpayer and the money never repaid because the graduate never earns enough to start repaying (eg the receptionist and part time worker above, who may never reach the repayment threshold)/30 years elapse/they reach 65?