[bacon]

delete

[Excelsior]

(09-23-2012 06:12 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  

Sorry Athlone, but you do lose women chasing money. It's because chasing money costs you the most valuable commodities of all, time and the freedom to do what you want with it.

Any argument can be proven false when you take it to an extreme.

Give too much of yourself chasing money and behave like a massive beta chode in the process (ex: settle for the horse faced 6 and close off other female options later) and yes, you can lose women chasing money. You can't unwisely sacrifice 100% of yourself and expect no negative consequences.

Swallow the red pill and make sure to consider lifestyle factors as you seek to establish yourself financially? You will not lose women chasing money, you will absolutely gain them in the end. You will have the resources to game well beyond your early 30's and even set yourself up very comfortably overseas if you'd like. You can dress "G" as regularly as you want, travel at will, and ensure you never have a logistics concern again anywhere you go.

Your story does not refute my theory, it affirms it. All of this:

Quote:

I am absolutely certain beyond any doubt now that I'm going into one of the "lifestyle" specialties without a particularly tough residency and where I can control my work hours to the point where I'm only working the amount required to comfortably support a life of frequent travel and other worthwhile experiences. And of course banging bitches. And my life is going to be 100 times more awesome than some overworked neurosurgeon with <10 lifetime notches and a 6 wife who he never sees anyway.

...fits right into the the statement. You will gain women by focusing on establishing your medical career, though you'll avoid going to an extreme by tying yourself down to a 6 and spending 7 years trying to become a neurosurgeon (which could cost you women).
The financial stability you secure with your specialty will ensure you more women in the long run than if you devoted that time in school instead to primarily chasing tail. That would just cost you money.

[gringochileno]

(09-23-2012 08:34 PM)Athlone McGinnis Wrote:  

(09-23-2012 06:12 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  

Sorry Athlone, but you do lose women chasing money. It's because chasing money costs you the most valuable commodities of all, time and the freedom to do what you want with it.

Any argument can be proven false when you take it to an extreme.

Give too much of yourself chasing money and behave like a massive beta chode in the process (ex: settle for the horse faced 6 and close off other female options later) and yes, you can lose women chasing money. You can't unwisely sacrifice 100% of yourself and expect no negative consequences.

Swallow the red pill and make sure to consider lifestyle factors as you seek to establish yourself financially? You will not lose women chasing money, you will absolutely gain them in the end. You will have the resources to game well beyond your early 30's and even set yourself up very comfortably overseas if you'd like. You can dress "G" as regularly as you want, travel at will, and ensure you never have a logistics concern again anywhere you go.

Your story does not refute my theory, it affirms it. All of this:

Quote:

I am absolutely certain beyond any doubt now that I'm going into one of the "lifestyle" specialties without a particularly tough residency and where I can control my work hours to the point where I'm only working the amount required to comfortably support a life of frequent travel and other worthwhile experiences. And of course banging bitches. And my life is going to be 100 times more awesome than some overworked neurosurgeon with <10 lifetime notches and a 6 wife who he never sees anyway.

...fits right into the the statement. You will gain women by focusing on establishing your medical career, though you'll avoid going to an extreme by tying yourself down to a 6 and spending 7 years trying to become a neurosurgeon (which could cost you women).
The financial stability you secure with your specialty will ensure you more women in the long run than if you devoted that time in school instead to primarily chasing tail. That would just cost you money.

I think we're pretty much in agreement. It's about balance. You've got to work enough to secure some source of funding if you want your lifestyle to be sustainable over the long haul (gotta pay for meals and plane tickets and all that), but at the same time you can't commit so much time to making money that you miss out on the very experiences that your income stream was supposed to enable in the first place. If I had it to do over again I would still go to medical school, but I am so fucking glad that I woke up to what the reality in most of the workaholic-like specialties is like before I potentially committed to one of them. All I'm saying is that there definitely is a loss of other opportunities with every amount of work that you do (although there is a net gain up to a certain point due to the enabling effect of income), and many people don't acknowledge the very real significance of that opportunity cost.

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Lloyd Blankfein and Jaime Dimon are massive disappointments! I mean, they're so evil, manipulative and greedy in the financial arena, yet their skills don't seem to transfer well into love lives. I imagined they'd be like Hugh Hefner.

[Wutang]

I was at this strip club in Manhattan called Flashdancers that is popular with this crowd and I started talking to this guy who was sitting near me; turns out he was the a VP for Cantor Fitzgerald. Guy was single and was talking about how Hungary was the best country for getting hookers and how the reason he knew that this was the case was because he had been all around the world for his whore mongering activities. He invited me to go along with him the next time he went even though I had just met this guy lol

[Fenix]

(09-23-2012 06:12 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  

...chasing money costs you the most valuable commodities of all, time and the freedom to do what you want with it.

if you're successful, you might gain more opportunities in the long run, but you'll definitely lose some in the present.

[RichieP]

The standard rationalization I hear from finance people in London is "get in and get out".

stories/fantasies of going into Equity Sales/Trading/ibanking, making £100-400k /yr before age 30, saving a packet then being able to retire and live a jetsetter life in their mid 30s.

Then again, thats what everyone plans to do or says they know someone doing, but I have yet to hear of someone who actually did that - ibanking or trading and saved up a million and retired at 35 and lived off the interest.

Seems like far more go the path described here - get sucked into 80hr work weeks, settle for an LTR with an okay girl, and blow their cash on hookers, cars, and coke. Repeat until burned out, retired or dead from heart-attack, without actually having saved much or really lived. To be fair, seems like they're having a level of fun with it - but yeah, I think you can have more deep fulfilment+adventure with an average income, freedom of time, flexibility to travel, learn languages, do pickup, do meaningful work, etc.

Then again, if someone actually could go the "get in and get out" path, it would be pretty sick to have a mil or two in the bank at 35. If you could get there without destroying your health, you're set for life and could THEN do a lifetime of travel/adventure/learning just by living off a portion of the interest. Dunno if that's realistic or if there's any real life examples of people who've actually planned to do that and done that though.

what do yall think?

[Tex Pro]

(09-24-2012 08:39 AM)RichieP Wrote:  

The standard rationalization I hear from finance people in London is "get in and get out".

stories/fantasies of going into Equity Sales/Trading/ibanking, making £100-400k /yr before age 30, saving a packet then being able to retire and live a jetsetter life in their mid 30s.

Then again, thats what everyone plans to do or says they know someone doing, but I have yet to hear of someone who actually did that - ibanking or trading and saved up a million and retired at 35 and lived off the interest.

Seems like far more go the path described here - get sucked into 80hr work weeks, settle for an LTR with an okay girl, and blow their cash on hookers, cars, and coke. Repeat until burned out, retired or dead from heart-attack, without actually having saved much or really lived. To be fair, seems like they're having a level of fun with it - but yeah, I think you can have more deep fulfilment+adventure with an average income, freedom of time, flexibility to travel, learn languages, do pickup, do meaningful work, etc.

Then again, if someone actually could go the "get in and get out" path, it would be pretty sick to have a mil or two in the bank at 35. If you could get there without destroying your health, you're set for life and could THEN do a lifetime of travel/adventure/learning just by living off a portion of the interest. Dunno if that's realistic or if there's any real life examples of people who've actually planned to do that and done that though.

what do yall think?

The problem is that almost no one "gets in and gets out." There is a reason high-paying jobs are often referred to as "golden handcuffs." Once you get used to making good money, you lifestyle grows to match your income. You get a nice car, you rent a decent apartment, you eat out at nicer restaurants, etc... Everyone says they will "get in get out", yet very few do.

The only guys I have ever heard of doing this are young entrepreneurs who start a company in their early twenties and sell it before they are thirty-five, and then can pretty much retire. But these tales are few and far in between, and don't represent at all the average finance nerd.

That is what guys like Athlone don't understand: there is very little work/life balance at these high paying corporate jobs. And you do lose out on chasing tale by working tons of hours during your youth. Also, the idea that you need to have "baller" level money and dress like a "G" to get laid abroad is bs and Roosh can attest to that.

Obviously you need some form of income, but that doesn't mean you have to kill yourself in some corporate sweatshop job like finance. There are plenty of ways to make money that don't involve spending your youth locked behind a desk for 12 - 15 hours a day.

[WestIndianArchie]

(09-22-2012 07:53 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Here is a slideshow of Wall Street guys with their wives:

http://www.businessinsider.com/wall-stre...es-2012-9#

Maybe they're banging hot Russian tail on the side?

These are the old guys, though. The younger i bankers surely are doing better.

Great book on the life, Wolf of Wall Street.

http://www.amazon.com/Wolf-Wall-Street-J...0553384775

Dude was stacking ends, doing drugs, and fucking all manner of strippers, in addition to having a trophy wife.

[tiggaling]

A friend who studied at the london school of economics said all his classmates were bound to become merchant bankers. He wasn't interested however, as right throughout your entire 20's, you have no life whatsoever, and then burnout around 30 and also retire. He said that the problem was, people like this then have no friends, settle with a mediocre lady, have kids and do jack shit and not be happy. (he knew guys like this)

I like the "4 hour workweek" model, thing is, few people are really going to make that work, and have the acumen and independent spirit to really pull it off.

And then even less people can really handle not working, and thrive and use their time wisely. It looks good on paper for many, but it takes self discipline I think. Also, the key seems to actually contribute something meaningful to the world - as there is fulfilment and meaning in that. On the other hand, I've been a kind of slave to that kind of meaning and creation, and am looking to being in a position where I can dedicate most of my time to FSU women and learning Russian! :-) But also have some time for creative projects, but not being ruled by them!

[highandtight]

This thread is sounding like a bit of sour grapes to me at this point. Y'all are getting a little carried away with the criticism and taking the comparison to an extreme. Setting up a strawman in other words.

Yes, of course, if you have mad game and are an outgoing, good looking dude you are going to pull more tail than a nerdy econ/math double major from MIT making $300k. Agreed. But, all things being relatively equal, you have to admit that a $300k salary rather than a, say, $50k salary affords you a lot of advantages. Don't underestimate the utility of a dope apartment in the West Village and a general apathy towards hopping around to a few bars and dropping $150 bucks without a care in the world.

[whosyourdaddy]

(09-23-2012 06:12 PM)gringochileno Wrote:  

One of the biggest lies that props up the current version of American society is that money or "prestige" is the key to getting access to more and/or better pussy. Fact is that the lifestyle required to have many of the careers that can lead to great wealth leaves you with very little time to pursue outside interests, including studying game and chasing girls (or god forbid taking a long vacation to see the world or have a fulfilling experience).

Yeah there may be some women who are attracted to someone with a "baller" bankroll, but if you're busting your ass 80 hours a week you're just not going to have a chance to run into many of those women in the first place, and even when you do meet them, your game's not going to be as tight because you spend most of your time working instead of approaching girls. It's a huge opportunity cost that goes outright unrecognized by a lot of people who think that slaving away to eventually make the big bucks is a good long-term plan for getting lots of ass or a hot girlfriend/wife.

I see this also in my field (medicine). Lots of med students settle for long-term girlfriends in the 5-7 range (often other med students whose schedules are as crazy as theirs) because it's perceived as too much work to go out and chase pussy constantly when they need to be studying or waking up at 4am for their call shift or whatever. Even the attending physicians who have supposedly "made it" end up marrying mediocre-looking chicks (again, often other doctors) because even after residency they're still working 60-80 hours or more and have little control over their work schedules because they're constantly beholden to their patients, the hospital, and what have you. And this is after completing 4 years of medical school and 3-7 years of residency/fellowships, when you're likely to be in your early-mid 30s! Yeah, you're a hotshot surgeon making over 200K now but you missed out on a lot of experiences to get there, your wife still looks like a horse, and your life still sucks.

Probably the best thing that Roosh and this forum have done for my life (beyond even learning game) was waking me up to this reality and enabling me to reorient my goals before it's too late. I am absolutely certain beyond any doubt now that I'm going into one of the "lifestyle" specialties without a particularly tough residency and where I can control my work hours to the point where I'm only working the amount required to comfortably support a life of frequent travel and other worthwhile experiences. And of course banging bitches. And my life is going to be 100 times more awesome than some overworked neurosurgeon with <10 lifetime notches and a 6 wife who he never sees anyway.

Sorry Athlone, but you do lose women chasing money. It's because chasing money costs you the most valuable commodities of all, time and the freedom to do what you want with it.

Don't forget that the neurosurgeon guy can retire after 10-15 years if he doesn't get too caught up with his spending habits. 600K a year for 10-15 years is 6-9 million gross, meaning he could retire with 2-3 million.

Gotta admit that lots of high paying jobs just are barely worth it these days. Lots of jobs, you only get paid in proportion to amount of crap you have to put up with; hard to beat this whole "system" where you have good hours, fulfilling work and great pay and without tons of debt or having to work your butt off to get there. In other words, your whole reward for hard work, is even MORE HARD WORK!! (albeit at much higher pay)

If you take into consideration that an MD has to work his ass off for 12 years (4 years college, 4 years med school, 4 years residency) AND pay off a 250K loan. Heck, I was looking at grad school recently, and private MBA programs can cost like 150K!

[whosyourdaddy]

(09-24-2012 09:23 AM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

(09-24-2012 08:39 AM)RichieP Wrote:  

The standard rationalization I hear from finance people in London is "get in and get out".

stories/fantasies of going into Equity Sales/Trading/ibanking, making £100-400k /yr before age 30, saving a packet then being able to retire and live a jetsetter life in their mid 30s.

Then again, thats what everyone plans to do or says they know someone doing, but I have yet to hear of someone who actually did that - ibanking or trading and saved up a million and retired at 35 and lived off the interest.

Seems like far more go the path described here - get sucked into 80hr work weeks, settle for an LTR with an okay girl, and blow their cash on hookers, cars, and coke. Repeat until burned out, retired or dead from heart-attack, without actually having saved much or really lived. To be fair, seems like they're having a level of fun with it - but yeah, I think you can have more deep fulfilment+adventure with an average income, freedom of time, flexibility to travel, learn languages, do pickup, do meaningful work, etc.

Then again, if someone actually could go the "get in and get out" path, it would be pretty sick to have a mil or two in the bank at 35. If you could get there without destroying your health, you're set for life and could THEN do a lifetime of travel/adventure/learning just by living off a portion of the interest. Dunno if that's realistic or if there's any real life examples of people who've actually planned to do that and done that though.

what do yall think?

The problem is that almost no one "gets in and gets out." There is a reason high-paying jobs are often referred to as "golden handcuffs." Once you get used to making good money, you lifestyle grows to match your income. You get a nice car, you rent a decent apartment, you eat out at nicer restaurants, etc... Everyone says they will "get in get out", yet very few do.

The only guys I have ever heard of doing this are young entrepreneurs who start a company in their early twenties and sell it before they are thirty-five, and then can pretty much retire. But these tales are few and far in between, and don't represent at all the average finance nerd.

That is what guys like Athlone don't understand: there is very little work/life balance at these high paying corporate jobs. And you do lose out on chasing tale by working tons of hours during your youth. Also, the idea that you need to have "baller" level money and dress like a "G" to get laid abroad is bs and Roosh can attest to that.

Obviously you need some form of income, but that doesn't mean you have to kill yourself in some corporate sweatshop job like finance. There are plenty of ways to make money that don't involve spending your youth locked behind a desk for 12 - 15 hours a day.

Yep, all these guys ever care about is prestige. It's like Bateman in American Psycho. They spend big bucks to get a good pad on the Upper East Side or in Greenwich, CT, buy REALLY expensive antique or modern furniture, etc, etc.

I think Bateman was actually obsessed with a expensive pen in the movie.

Plus, you'll need to spend beaucoup dollars on your kids-- private schools, Ivy league education, summers in France, etc.

[RichieP]

(09-24-2012 11:17 AM)whosyourdaddy Wrote:  

Yep, all these guys ever care about is prestige. It's like Bateman in American Psycho. They spend big bucks to get a good pad on the Upper East Side or in Greenwich, CT, buy REALLY expensive antique or modern furniture, etc, etc.

I think Bateman was actually obsessed with a expensive pen in the movie.

Plus, you'll need to spend beaucoup dollars on your kids-- private schools, Ivy league education, summers in France, etc.

The thing is though, in theory you dont have to. you *could* just live modestly or at least saving a big chunk every year until you're 35 and then retire.

It just seems like very few people do. And I wonder whether that's because of the nature of the ppl who go into it (bateman & co), or the nature of the work and work environment (e.g. leaves you no time to do truly fulfilling/enjoyable stuff, so you spend big to compensate, and also everyone else is doing it --> pressure to keep up and not be left out, then you'd have NO social life atall lol)

[Samseau]

Quote:

I think Bateman was actually obsessed with a expensive pen in the movie.

[Bad Hussar]

Well, Lisa Maria Falcone looks cute. Some of the rest may have been hot in their day. Interesting that I don't see a single wife/girlfriend who I am sure would qualify as overweight as per the BMI. A couple maybe close, but nearly 0 for 16 amongst WAG's of rich Wall Streeter's. Is it really that simplistic in the USA? Lot's of money = slim women. Little money = big women.

Investment bankers and the like aren't the top of the pile. The saying that "ownership is 9/10ths of the law" is relevant. Unless they get to partner/managing director status and are given stakes in the banks they are just highly paid employees, and as others have mentioned they usually just blow their earnings anyway. It's the people who OWN any company who are at the top. And they don't necessarily have to work there. Or if they do, nobody can dictate their hours. It's always amusing to me when some corporate flunky starts trying to throw his weight around in a self-serving way, rather than in the interests of the owners. It's like managers think they own the place.

I don't know much about the other areas of investment banking, but traders can be pretty insane people. I don't think I've ever met a trader who could be described as a "nerd". Quantitative Analyst, sure, but not a trader. They are some of the biggest partiers in the world.

If they are exceptionally valuable to their bank an investment banker who wanted to partially get out of the rat race could negotiate a 6 months on/6 months off schedule. Work 80 hour weeks for 6 months of the year as usual. The other 6 months travel the world, or whatever, and only deal with clients when absolutely necessary, and only by email/phone.

[Excelsior]

(09-24-2012 08:39 AM)RichieP Wrote:  

The standard rationalization I hear from finance people in London is "get in and get out".

stories/fantasies of going into Equity Sales/Trading/ibanking, making £100-400k /yr before age 30, saving a packet then being able to retire and live a jetsetter life in their mid 30s.

Then again, thats what everyone plans to do or says they know someone doing, but I have yet to hear of someone who actually did that - ibanking or trading and saved up a million and retired at 35 and lived off the interest.

Then again, if someone actually could go the "get in and get out" path, it would be pretty sick to have a mil or two in the bank at 35. If you could get there without destroying your health, you're set for life and could THEN do a lifetime of travel/adventure/learning just by living off a portion of the interest. Dunno if that's realistic or if there's any real life examples of people who've actually planned to do that and done that though.

what do yall think?

My school is crawling with past and future financiers, and I know of plenty who have in fact "gotten out". They've either left finance altogether in the mid 30's or they've transitioned to a decent, though less well paying gig within the industry (read: not New York I-Bank/Hedge Fund). Some even go overseas-I have relatives who have done this. The same is true of associates at top law firms.

Maybe they're a minority, but they aren't that rare.

(09-24-2012 09:23 AM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

The problem is that almost no one "gets in and gets out." There is a reason high-paying jobs are often referred to as "golden handcuffs." Once you get used to making good money, you lifestyle grows to match your income. You get a nice car, you rent a decent apartment, you eat out at nicer restaurants, etc... Everyone says they will "get in get out", yet very few do.

If you have no discipline and/or your self-worth is tied entirely to the maintenance of enhanced prestige then yes, you're fucked. You will trap yourself in the cycle and be unable to throttle down, because the name on the card means too damn much to you.

Then again, I assumed that many of us (being red pill and all that) were a bit better than this. This is absolutely not the impossible hurdle you're saying it is.

(09-24-2012 09:23 AM)The Texas Prophet Wrote:  

The only guys I have ever heard of doing this are young entrepreneurs who start a company in their early twenties and sell it before they are thirty-five, and then can pretty much retire. But these tales are few and far in between, and don't represent at all the average finance nerd.

I have heard many such "tales" involving financiers, and even more regarding lawyers.
Many average finance nerds do get "caught up", but this escape does not seem nearly as rare as you think. I know, in fact, from experience that it isn't as rare as you think.
Also, we're not average.

Quote:

That is what guys like Athlone don't understand: there is very little work/life balance at these high paying corporate jobs. And you do lose out on chasing tale by working tons of hours during your youth.

I understand plenty. Finance is often 70-90 hours a week or more. BigLaw, depending on where you are, can be 60-80 or more.

The point is that one is not required to deal with those realities forever.
Your entire argument hinges on the notion that it is not possible to get out, when it actually is. One can maximize the financial benefits while minimizing the long term consequences, and in doing so he can also maximize the long term game-related benefits.
Do this correctly, and any female you miss chasing at 22 will be irrelevant by the time you are 30/35-there will be many more available to you by then.

"But most of the finance nerds I know don't do this!!!!"

Sure, the average, super-beta male finance/law/consulting chump may get caught in the cycle. He might stick to his frumpy college girl (who is in the industry too and "completes him"). He might get caught up in the lifestyle (having been a nerd his whole life, the prestige now allows him to lord it over people and boost his own self-esteem; he's too insecure to give it up). He might just turn into a long-term prestige whore, or blow all his money on "models and bottles" to validate himself.

Think about who we are. The average beta male, when it comes to women, serenades them, takes them on dinner dates far too early, doesn't make a move, acts like a "nice guy", and is other wise highly prone to placing any decent looking female on a pedestal.

99% of men cannot do better than this. 99% of guys do not "get out" of this emasculating cycle.
We're above that. We do not fit any average paradigms regarding mate choice in this society, so why must you assume that we will fit any paradigm regarding career progression given our knowledge?

If there are any men capable of seeing the writing on the wall and avoiding the golden handcuffs, then they post on this forum. I know I can do it, and I'm certainly not a special snowflake.

Quote:

Also, the idea that you need to have "baller" level money and dress like a "G" to get laid abroad is bs and Roosh can attest to that.

1. Point to where I indicated that this was an absolute requirement. I'm not going to fight your strawmen.

2. I said that these things are a major benefit to any player, and a few years of hard work (reasoned and balanced, of course-don't sacrifice a decade and get locked down with a 6 in desperation) can provide a nice advantage.
There's not a hint of nuance in your argument. I suppose that's by design.

Quote:

It just seems like very few people do. And I wonder whether that's because of the nature of the ppl who go into it (bateman & co)

Speaking as a student at what could be loosely described as a corporate vocational school (few hit harder in wall street recruiting than my university on a per capita basis), I can tell you that this "prestige whoring" starts well before they head out for recruiting.
Their nature's are set before the whole game even starts. We're talking prep-school here.
By the time they're on campus, that nature is on full display and it dominates most aspects of social life here (ex: the greek scene).

[Samseau]

Athlone, you underestimate how corrupting the biglaw/finance world is. It doesn't matter how strong your will is, it is impossible to go through these institutions without becoming a worse person. It warps everyone, no one is immune.

[Icarus]

I don't think anyone has explicitly mentioned this: Finance can be suicide by work. More examples of "suicide by work": Medicine, Law, playing the startup roulette in the Silly Con Valley.

If you hate yourself, if you perceive yourself as weak, if you're physically unattractive, if you believe that there is nothing you can do to make yourself attractive and captivating to other people and, especially, to the opposite gender, then suicide is, in theory, an alluring option. But committing actual suicide is messy, and after you're dead your "friends" will be talking about you with pity and contempt. If you are addicted to the approval of others, then this is utterly unbearable.

This is where "suicide by work" becomes an attractive option. It allows you to avoid life and have a socially accepted excuse for it. See, instead of slowly killing yourself, you're trying to "make it big". If you work 90 hours per week or more, you have absolutely no time to think, and having no time to think is the perfect escape from the demons that haunt you. "Suicide by work" is what joining a monastery was a few centuries back: a socially accepted exit for self-loathing omegas. Why would happy, balanced people put themselves through such abuse?

Is this the whole picture? No. There are some people in demanding jobs who just love it. They love the prestige and power. They need the love of many people, and the best way to attain it is to rise the corporate ladder or become someone who society lauds. Those people love their jobs, and are loved back. But they are rare.

Of all the truly happy people I met in my life, none of them had a high-flying job. Some did it for a while in their early 20s, but quickly realized that sacrificing one's life for it was too much. The unhappy, the morbidly ugly, the mentally deranged... those stick around, because they have nowhere to go, and they really do not want to be alone with their demons and thoughts of inadequacy.

[highandtight]

(09-24-2012 01:55 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

Athlone, you underestimate how corrupting the biglaw/finance world is. It doesn't matter how strong your will is, it is impossible to go through these institutions without becoming a worse person. It warps everyone, no one is immune.

I work in a big law firm in NYC. It's definitely got some serious downsides (long hours, at times high stress) but at the end of the day it's really just a job. I have friends in other industries that work long hours for less than half the pay. At the end of the day there's nothing magical about it -- it's just long hours for relatively high pay. I've worked blue collar jobs before this and it's akin to working some serious overtime.

To say that you'll become a "worse person" is in my opinion an exaggeration. It can be challenging to find time to stay fit, active, happy, and interesting, but it's doable. And I'm not the only guy around here that gets after it. You'd be surprised to see just how "normal" the people are around here. And I mean that in the truest sense: some losers, some nerds, some arrogant dbags, some hard working betas, some nice enough guys with cute wives, and some dudes chasing tail. Nothing special.

Back to the overall theme: someone said above that these wives are often not chosen for looks, and I think that rings true. But that's a choice those guys have made. I'm confident that many of these guys get some tail on the side, or could if they wanted to.

[Bad Hussar]

(09-24-2012 02:17 PM)highandtight Wrote:  

...
I work in a big law firm in NYC. It's definitely got some serious downsides (long hours, at times high stress) but at the end of the day it's really just a job. I have friends in other industries that work long hours for less than half the pay. At the end of the day there's nothing magical about it -- it's just long hours for relatively high pay. I've worked blue collar jobs before this and it's akin to working some serious overtime.
...

Can you explain why it is necessary for EVERY associate, and even partner, at top law firms to work excessive hours? What would the approach be if someone who, say, got really good grades at a top 10 law school stated in an interview with a prospective firm he was looking for a role with lower hours, and would accept proportionally less pay as a result? Would he be dismissed as a slacker?

I mean, I understand the concept of economies of scale, but hiring three associates to do what two would usually do in an 80 hour week isn't going to make that much difference. Do partners really have that little regard for their and their underlings time and well being that they push everyone literally to the brink? All for the sake of saving a couple of sq feet of extra office space and some other small costs. Or are good lawyers really that rare that there is an excess of work for the available legal minds? It sounds insane to me.

[Divorco]

(09-24-2012 02:50 PM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

why it is necessary for EVERY associate... to work excessive hours?

These jobs are cyclical, and turnover is costly. So they hire minimally during downturns, and overwork during booms. Also, it is a career tournament lottery. They underpay you for years. Then if you are diligent and lucky, you know the ropes and become partner during a boom. Partners are overpaid and consequently hypervigilant.

On average, employees get fairly paid over their careers. Turnover is minimal (not disruptive), and everybody is motivated. Also, law firms must be partnerships.

[highandtight]

(09-24-2012 02:50 PM)Bad Hussar Wrote:  

Can you explain why it is necessary for EVERY associate, and even partner, at top law firms to work excessive hours? What would the approach be if someone who, say, got really good grades at a top 10 law school stated in an interview with a prospective firm he was looking for a role with lower hours, and would accept proportionally less pay as a result? Would he be dismissed as a slacker?

I mean, I understand the concept of economies of scale, but hiring three associates to do what two would usually do in an 80 hour week isn't going to make that much difference. Do partners really have that little regard for their and their underlings time and well being that they push everyone literally to the brink? All for the sake of saving a couple of sq feet of extra office space and some other small costs. Or are good lawyers really that rare that there is an excess of work for the available legal minds? It sounds insane to me.

Well my friend, this is something that my coworkers and I constantly bitch about. Rationally, you'd think it would make sense to hire the extra associate, bring weekly hours down, and save money on the very real and quite extensive costs involved in turnover. And there are costs: my firm has lost work from clients due to high turnover, and I'm at a relatively low turnover firm compared to some of the real heavyweights in the city.

The best I can tell you is that yes, many of the partners really do have that little regard for their associates. Maybe not actively; I think a lot of these guys are just busy, focused on client retention and turning over a good work product, and just don't really pay attention to the law firm management issues.

The hiring thing is crazy, too. We're understaffed right now but the bosses will basically only hire people with experience from a peer firm. Stupid policy if you ask me. Entry level hiring is way too low, both at my firm, at all other firms that I know of, and probably in lots of other industries.

As to your interviewing question, I wouldn't recommend it. You may get an uptight interviewer that interprets it as "this guy doesn't want to work hard."

[brownman]

I hail from a medical family with extensive banking connects. I've walked on two of the paths, first medicine and then finance, many of my peers went on those paths. Golden handcuffs is spot on, wealth and status to hide insecurities. You become a highly educated slave - bankers, lawyers, consultants and doctors fit this bill. Entrepreneurs too until they hit the money, that could be anywhere from 3 -15 years of busting your ass. If you are smart though, you can travel, follow your passions and spend time with family while owning your own business.

In a capitalist system, entrepreneurs win. In any system, doctors win - medical school is the safest bet. About the exit strategies for white-shoe careers, many go into corporate and a select few keep going. A few do go start up companies but you are thinking of guys with multi-million dollar companies, they are few and far between, most of them have a pretty unique background anyways.

Regarding the hours for banking, lots of down time man. You can be chilling with nothing to do for half a day and then be overloaded with work. I remember discussing the pussy issue with bankers, it's just a wiser choice to go for an escort. The ROI of gaming women isn't enough to merit that. As for most the big guys, they have mistresses on the side but it's on the serious DL.

I remember crashing a party with lots of high level government and business people, saw many 9s. The finest girl there was on one dude's arm, he turns around and it's an uncle of mine whom I'd never have assumed to pull that. Money over bitches. You can post ads on Craigslist and can find a mistress in the big cities, mostly college girls looking to make a buck - they usually have a few guys in rotation.

For doctors intermarrying, the main reason they marry is because nobody can understand their lives other than their peers - it's a different world. They are a different breed, as are all lawyers, bankers and consultants. To compete at a high level, you have to be an all star otherwise they don't even give you a second look - you play a different game. I've seen the lifestyle vs. career argument in my family and will always advocate lifestyle, it's always a bitch getting that across to people though - many will just never understand.

If you choose medicine, go the family practice route. For business and law types, save yourself the trouble of running the rat race and start a company - use the cash to travel for inspiration.

[Divorco]

(09-24-2012 04:30 PM)brownman Wrote:  

I hail from a medical family ... - medical school is the safest bet. ... I ... will always advocate lifestyle ... . If you choose medicine, go the family practice route.

Medical school is "safe" but family practice is not lucrative. Instead you will get overworked by an HMO at a medium wage while servicing a $200K medical school debt. Other posters can give specifics about underpaid, overworked residents, etc. But the main point is that high-paying careers usually suck, or are hard to get. You don't just sleep through four years of medical school, and wake up to the pay of a brain surgeon with the low stress lifestyle of an anesthesiologist or radiologist, with no student loans or malpractice insurance.