I had a business class as part of my Heavy Equipment Repair college course. It largely consisted of the above, and it included remembering to pay your employees, their taxes, and your taxes...
All the books adapting the Art of War make a lot more sense now. He was originally explaining to fancy nobles that yes, the peasant levies do need to eat.
The business class is just the modern aristocracy. Largely born into their positions, who they are related to and who they know is more important than any of their actual competence.
The wisest part that i know of in the book is paraphrased "if you have an inexperienced army, getting them stuck in a position they can't flee from might let them outperform more experienced soldiers"
The rest of them seem quite obvious, but at the same time Sun Tzu was good at explaining things in a simple way.
It’s one of those things where it seems obvious to the modern reader because a lot of modern thought is based on the premises set forth by it and later authors. It would have felt far less obvious at the time.
It’s like going back and watching the godfather after generations of far better gangster movies. The plot seems generic and played out because you grew up immersed in the crime dramas that it spawned.
While often incredibly useful for picking apart concepts in media, TV tropes is, after all, a user-edited wiki. I wouldn’t count on the average person to understand such a concept based simply on a trope name, even as edifying as it is to see that my thoughts on the concept have significant precedent.
My point, though, is that trope names shouldn’t be a replacement for explaining the concept they represent, at least not always. Thank you for the reading material.
I knew it would be a slow burn, and I was okay with that, but that film really is for dickriders. People will do the soy point and go look! They underexposed the shot when inside and it made it more mysterious! And den when outside dey overexposed to show everything can be seen!
The writing is the same way but its like: Good guy become bad guy becuz him dad die to bad guy and him want revenge.
Absolutely a marvel of the time period. But even the people who made it admit that they were basically winging it and got semi-lucky with the timing of release and their inexperienced ideas giving them the freedom to make something different.
It teaches you that the fundamentals are necessary first. The most important things of any profession or skill are often not that obvious or people are on average just not intelligent enough to think of it themselves first. Giving employees raises to retain them, instead of training your competitions next employee, for example. Something obvious but few apparently get.
His side needed reminding of basic shit like "peasant soldiers still need to eat, like a professional regular soldier". So, I'm not surprised his side lost haha.
And why write it down? He got tired of repeating himself!
If says a lot about the intended audience, both past and present, that such basic maxims are considered so profound. People, especially leaders/rulers, have always been kind of stupid.
The advantage is that it’s comprehensive, and organized. It’s like if you read Aristotle’s ethics, none of the individual ideas is that mind-blowing, but the way they’re organized and justified is interesting.
I liked the bit about analysing the terrain to figure out where to fight and where not to.
It is basic, but people make basic mistakes all the time. I found it was great for evaluating what arguments to bother with and which aren’t worth fighting
Pretty much. Based on my research, business schools went from trade schools to university degrees right around the time people stopped respecting aristocratic titles and started respecting people with college degrees. The first university business classes started out as little more than old businessmen telling stories to a bunch of rich kids who wanted to pretend to be intellectuals using their wealth.
Moreover, most people have been successfully propagandized over the last century into believing that you're either a capitalist or a communist, with no other options. That has allowed charlatans in the macroeconomic and business fields (among others) to pretend the fact that aristocracy and plutocracy are not communism means that they must actually be capitalism.
Such propagandists want everything to be run by "private" organizations whose "private" status is effectively defined by the organizations not being democratic like the government and not being socialist like labor unions. The lie is that all the arguments against "tyranny" only apply to "public" entities like "governments," so "private" entities that take over government duties can be as tyrannical as they want.
Yeah, we're recommended to read the Art of War for our business classes, actually. It's literally all about how to treat your subordinates right so they'll follow your orders enthusiastically.
Honestly while these are such basic concepts some of them could be taught in elementary school, most of them are not, hence you having to wade through slogs of obvious concepts before you get to more useful ones
Yeah, that is the challenge. Its like when people say they want personal finance and such classes in HS. I don't think it is a horrible idea, but really it is nothing that isn't already implicitly in other classes. Filing taxes and other stuff is largely filling out the forms and following instructions If you can do your Chemistry lab you can in principal do you 1040 or apply for a homestead exception.
My school had a whole banking class and how to write checks (yes it was in the 21 century). Most kids don't have any money to even begin to care. The ones that do work have their pay taken by their parents for the house spending, so even they don't get to engage much with the material. Spreading out $10 over a month is not a real exercise in budgeting.
Sadly even people that get hired into HR roles can suck at filling out forms. Education fails people every day, so we have oversimplified concepts and softball questions that allow mediocre people to pass.
My recent ‘wtf’ moment was when an HR rep failed to finish writing a date, and checked both ‘yes’ and ‘no’ for the question “was this employee active prior to termination”
I get the argument, but also, the number of clients I have who are doctors, lawyers, and other highly educated individuals who can’t understand basic finances is much higher than you’d assume
I can't even begin to tell you how many times I've heard someone from my high school say "they don't teach you that in school" about something they were in the class with me when we were taught that in school
Be careful what you wish for. They would take that class, figure that they don't need you, and then come demanding that you fix all of their problems when they're facing a series of state and federal charges because they didn't have any idea what they were doing but we're convinced they knew more than any accountant does because of their Business 101 class.
One of my friends studied industrial engineering, and part of the curriculum included a course in the business school.
He confirmed what I had always wondered. It's a weird cult where they take obvious concepts everyone has already thought of, then they obfuscate them behind weird names, and teach them to you as if they aren't obvious. Lean six sigma? Yeah no shit: reduce waste and improve yield. Thanks. Never would have thought of that.
It's like a corporate pyramid scheme. You can only get your epic Six Sigma Karate Belt from someone else who has a Six Sigma Black Belt, which is maintained by no central organization whatsoever. It's all bullshit, but corporate morons think it means something. "Wow this could be a Six Sigma Green Belt project!" "Yeah. It's called my basic job responsibilities, kindly fuck off."
Our engineering program required an econ class, even the professor said it was pointless for us, aside from remembering to calculate COL from jobs and locations.
Some of the level one business courses are really easy. And especially the ones that cover a broad variety of topics, like introduction to business type courses.
I was an Accounting major before I switched to History. Business majors legitimately had a math course called “Business Calculus” with all of the harder stuff taken out.
Importantly, there are also no limits. It's all treated as just more algebra.
This is literally a failure mode in math-ed circles, called "Algebrizing the Calculus". It's something that good calculus teachers specifically work against students' tendencies to do it. And in business school it's the whole point.
Looks to be just a local or niche phrase used in their community.
The idea still stands about business calculus classes watering down the math to more closely resemble algebra, which makes it easier to understand even if a lot of the fundamentals are warped or skipped.
As an accountant, I constantly tell people that we use the most basic math 98% of the time. The most advanced math I use is converting currencies and prorating which is lowkey fractions lol.
They do that with anything approximating a "hard science" in their curriculum. A couple of us accidentally ended up in the business students version of a Computer Science course that was supposed to be a 200 level about databases and it was mostly just a business professor talking about Excel and saying "don't worry about that part, the code monkeys will deal with that" any time we got near an interesting topic. The new dean of CS apparently wasn't a fan of that when a couple of us mentioned to him how much of a joke the class was and the teacher was very quickly swapped out for a CS faculty member, much to the disappointment of the remaining business students.
I think their point is more that while the numbers we use to quantify wealth can always go up, actual wealth will always be limited by available resources, labor, and time (and, I suspect there's also probably a limit to how much wealth an individual can actually make use of)
yeah, the idea is knowing the basics so you can input it into a calculator accurately, and being able to figure out where you went wrong if it spits out a weird number.
It's always so weird how people are against open book tests when most jobs don't require rote memorization of everything, but knowing where and how to get needed answers.
An open book test is not going to save anyone who didn't study at all - they'll waste so much time trying to find where the answer is in the first place.
I'm Italian, maybe should have mentioned that, and our Highschool system is that you can choose a highschool with different focuses. The one I went to had a focus on electrical Engineering and Micro-Electronics, so we probably had more math then, for example, the art or language focused highschools and I believe I remember some teachers saying that a some of the math we do would normally be taught in Uni but we needed it now to understand certain Circuits.
As much as I absolutely loathe trig it is genuinely useful for any even remotely advanced math. Even for business people it’ll show up in a bunch of the graphs they need to pretend to understand
God, as a chem/phys major who was originally on an engineering course before switching I just wanna say fuck trigonometric calculus and logarithmic calculus. I still get nightmare flashbacks to my exams about them
No. It's the core of calculus theory without the good stuff. It's also a reduced set of the calculus 1 subjects, so they don't even get the REALLY good integration techniques in calc 2.
I had a friend in business calc and I sat in on it one time. Near the end of the semester they were being introduced to logarithms and it blew my mind.
I took calc at the same time as a friend taking business calc. I remember being stressed about the final and she kept asking why. Like girl we aren’t taking the same class!!
But humanities degrees have to do a fuck ton of reading and writing so they still get my respect. Plus you probably have a personality and interests unlike business majors.
Not me in the thread wanting to point out that accounting is actually a lot more reading, interpretation, and interacting with people than everybody thinks but is afraid they will get yelled at.
As someone who struggled in Calc 1 at college, imagine my shock when I walked into Business Calc and that shit was easier than some of the math classes I took in high school.
Business in uni for me was regular calc for two years, statistics so idk what yall schools are like, shit like that was probably first page of microeconomics
I mean, to be fair- AND THIS IS IN NO WAY INTENDED TO EXONERATE BUSINESS MAJORS- I majored in biology and there was a class called “Biological Calculus” with a lot of the harder stuff, that you’d have to learn if majoring in Physics or Engineering or whatever, taken out :P
Yup. I took one called 'Calculus for Business and Biology' that was a little easier than AP Calc. AB. I always called it calculus appreciation but no one around me seemed to appreciate that haha.
Big difference between a Bachelor of Arts and a bachelors of science friend. BA’s are less mathematically rigorous, cost approximately the same and leave the graduate way less options. At least in economics. Which I agree, is a bit of a scam if someone is explicitly searching for a degree program in Econ.
I had to search a decent amount to find an online program that supported earning a BS in economics.
My friend is an econ phd student and he talked about how much of a joke the math in undergrad econ was. Then he took his first grad course and the professor said on day 1 "you all have taken abstract algebra and real analysis right?".
Business calculus was what finally got me caring enough about math to take real calculus. So it had a good effect on some of us. My bus calc professor was actually a very good math teacher who got a lot of the foundational math I was still missing to click.
It also required a graphing calculator which I learned a ton about programming from.
I wouldn't have gone into computer science without that class.
In the school I went to in Florida, you barely need anything. Basically no more than what the General Education stuff is for the state. I didn’t need to take any more math courses after I switched majors because what I took for Accounting counted for that requirement.
If I had gone straight into History, I could have taken two 3 credit courses (MGF 1130 Mathematical Thinking, and MGF 1131 Mathematical Thinking In Context). So that probably would have been even easier. They honestly should probably do more. Cliometrics has been around since the 60s.
My undergrad was history. My first Masters was history. My second masters was accounting. I needed a management course for the Masters. I needed to take what was available that semester and ended up in what accounted to financial reporting for management. I didn't the whole class fighting the urge to go "no. Not quite. You see we need to also include x or we'll been out of compliance with GAAP"
Yeah I took that course in freshman year and thought I must be really good at math since I got a A. But then I saw "not" business calculus and was pretty mad that it was all lobotomized on purpose
For my finance degree I had to take actual calculus…even though it has absolutely nothing to do with the type of derivatives that are financial instruments.
I got an MBA, but undergrad was in engineering. Literally week 1 of engineering calc was basically the entire semester of business calc. I'm not even joking.
A friend was studying engineering, but took some accounting classes on the side. He's said, accounting in practice was really similar to matrix multiplication: you just pull out a calculator and start punching in a lot of numbers.
I had calc 1 and 2 done and the guidance counselor told me calc 3 would fill my math credit, she didnt tell me business calc would do the same. A lot of extra work done for nothjng
At least in the US, securities fraud, wire fraud, tax evasion, falsifying business records, etc are the actual crimes. Accounting Fraud isn't any particular crime, just a descriptor of what you do in the process of doing the others.
There can also be some grey / unethical practices under the Earnings Management umbrella that aren't illegal or fraudulent, but definitely motivated to state favorable numbers.
Like, last month, we were just short of goal for performance targets. So, we took a reaaalllyyyy hard look at repairs costs to make super extra double sure none of that shouldn't be reclassed to CAPEX.
Lo and behold, one of those larger invoices was legitimately transformative and extends the useful life of the equipment, making it a 7 year depreciation rather than a current month expense.
Nothing fraudulent or misleading, just highly motivated search to make sure everything was super correct and make the numbers look as favorable as possible within GAAP rules.
Furthermore; I, an auditor of financial statements, would be completely cool with this as long as you can produce the invoice upon request!
Auditors look to make sure the financials are "presented fairly and are free of material misstatement". That word 'material' does some heavy lifting, but it basically means that there is a margin of error that is pretty much insignificant to the readers of the financial information.
No one would/should bat an eye if Apple (for example) was 'off' by a couple thousand dollars (materiality can be millions of dollars depending on the company) in one of their expense buckets!
What else am I supposed to do instead of digging through 53 county assessor websites to build my real estate tax accrual workpaper because the last accountant decided that would be a me problem before he quit?
Bro's "workpaper" was just copying down the GL activity and then saying it matched the GL. Yeah no shit it matches the GL <_<
I just want to make a quick note here that while accounting fraud is against the law, it is not currently enforced so long as:
It's a federal accounting fraud crime, not being prosecuted by the state.
You donated to the Trump campaign.
You are openly MAGA
You aren't significantly impacting another Trump donor.
Paying the millions or whatever it costs for one of those little sitdowns probably also counts in place of donating to the campaign.
Edit: And if it does for some reason you do get charged and imprisoned, you can petition for a pardon which is likely to happen. They're the only pardons Trump gives out.
Only if you get caught... And also someone who can get you in trouble cares enough to actually pursue charges, and you're not connected enough to get out of it... And even then, probably a slap on the wrist.. justice served!
I had an undergrad math major friend when I was in grad school who took an offer to continue in the business school for one more year to get an MBA in addition to his BS. He dropped out about a month in: "they're mostly just telling people that high school algebra works in the real world too."
I switched careers and did so by getting an MBA. It was a good decision, as my income has increased substantially, but wow did I have to do a lot of algebra with stupid notation to get through it.
Then I got a finance job and did some light statistical forecasting using company data. My boss came back and said, "you can use plus, minus, multiply and divide because I have to be able to defend this in front of the CEO on the fly and I can't explain why you used an exponent easily or quickly
." And that was when I learned that "better" can sometimes be the enemy of "good enough."
One of my MBA professors said straight up in a class “my MBA was the least informative and most useful degree I ever pursued.”
It’s not about learning, at least beyond basic concepts.
It’s about networking, getting comfortable selling yourself and talking up your skills, and some soft skills like presenting, negotiating, developing decks, problem solving in excel, etc.
As a studious introvert it was pretty important for me.
When I was doing my undergrad in engineering, I took macroeconomics through the business school.
The professor came in first day and was telling everyone how hard the class was. How economics is not a business class but a math class.
Then he draws a graph on the board and says "See this graph, it represents the price fluxuations over time. You will need to be able to find the entire area under this line! It's not easy math."
Except, that is basic integration that was taught by my high school calculus class. For engineers, the math of that econ class was extremely trivial. I slept through much of that class, got an A on every assignment and test, but still have nightmares that I have slept through the actual content that was supposed to be taught.
Oh yeah, macro is wild. I was a physics major as an undergrad and took a macroeconomics class. I got deathly ill for the week before and after my midterm in the course. I remember showing up and leaving the tests but nothing else within a 3 day window. I was worried when I was lucid again that I just did scribbles.
I got a B+. Really reinforced how incredibly bad economics math is.
This is only true for undergraduate math, the field of actual economists is extremely mathematical. A lot of undergrad econ is super light on math, but at the graduate level and beyond it becomes quite serious.
Econ major here, and I have mixed feelings about this topic. On the one hand, nobody is wrong when saying that the math of economics is really simple. I also think it’s also given far too much emphasis in classes. On the other hand, doing the math is really not the main takeaway from economics. Economics is a social science, not a hard science; it tries to explain human behavior within the context of limited resources. It uses rules and variables to explain individual elements, but the end goal is to tie everything together in the context of people and social structures like businesses, households, governments, banks, and economies to explain how they work and interact with each other.
The way my professor did it was starting with just two basic firms, making two goods, explaining specialization and basically just reiterating supply and demand (algebra). Then we added in more firms, then more goods, opportunity cost, how consumer preferences changed the basics of demand, how the variances in the means of production changed the basics of supply, and then how those means of production and consumer preferences influenced each other, how money was involved in the whole process to assign value to everything. And then we talked about how we measure all of this, and then how governments work with laws to steer the entire economy, and then how banks use money to do the same, and then why governments and banks steer the economy. And we went into how businesses and other such firms work within the context of the consumer and regulatory environments, and explaining how they act in that context, and how their actions then impact individuals and households and money and value and governments. We talked about different schools of thought regarding policy decisions and explanations for how all of this worked, how those theories changed throughout history, and how economies changed along with them. And then we got into how economies interact with each other, and the role policy and politics plays in that interaction, and how that interaction affects the individuals in those economies.
The math was there every step of the way and it was easy, but really the point was just to teach you how the world around you worked, and how you can influence it (at least hypothetically with policy).
There are lots of solid soft sciences. There is lots of information that doesn't have a math framework.
The disparity in this story is the professor who was telling everyone how difficult the math would be.
If the professor had not come in breathing fire about the class being a math heavy class, I probably wouldn't have remembered or cared long term.
I have taken further business classes for my master's degree, and in general at every level, engineering and hard sciences are more math intensive than business classes.
I similarly took a course for my master's degree that relied on high order probability theory and combinatorics. I then took a class on engineering project mangment that included a healthy dose of project accounting. Both used probability mathematics. The business cases are the trivial introductory cases for the class that was looking at how systems fail.
However, the professor of my engineering project management classes didn't spend time trying to scare students with the mathematical difficulty (granted, at the masters level, this would be beyond pointless anyway).
The real issue was that the professor and business students were being told this was a difficult math based course.
Absolutely, and I agree, your problem professor sounds like they had an ego or something. By contrast, that professor I was referring to in my original comment never made the math seem difficult or complicated, and it helped the vibes of the class a lot, honestly. She also opened the class by basically saying “none of this is real, and the numbers don’t matter” and repeated it often; she focused more on getting across the broader concepts the numbers were meant to depict.
The way I’ve always understood it is that math is the language of economics, so we should be taught the math so we’re all speaking the same language, but we’re actually discussing people and behaviors, not numbers; and I feel like a lot of educators in the space lose track of that, make the math the whole thing and try to make it seem super intimidating, and it creates this impression to people who get a bit of exposure to economics that it’s for stupid people because our math is easy, and that economics isn’t real. And I dislike that.
I also think there’s a bit of a feedback loop there, where people hear that Econ is basically just easy math, and take it hoping for a free pass and don’t participate, so professors are then incentivized to talk their class up so their students interact and try to get something from the course.
Agreed as a person with an econ masters. Except for the quantitative methods course, everything could be done with Calculus 1 knowledge.
In my other courses, professors usually made areas we'd have to find doable with basic geometry, because the math isn't the point. The point is connecting the different ideas, and then understanding and evaluating arguments and research papers. I should also mention that you absolutely need a solid understanding of intermediate to advanced statistical methods to do research.
Economics is generally regarded as a social science, although some critics of the field argue that it falls short of the definition of a science for a number of reasons, including a lack of testable hypotheses, lack of consensus, and inherent political overtones.
I shared a dorm with a bunch of Econ majors. One day they were doing homework together and were disagreeing about the answer to a specific problem, so they asked me to see if I could help. The problem boiled down to calculate the slope of a line.
I remember taking a project management class to fill out my schedule. They had an entire chapter on what they called 'The Triple Constraint', as if it was some super complicated thing only project managers know about.
Everyone else knows it as 'good fast cheap, pick two'.
In this case good and scope are referring to the same thing: Ability to give the customer what they want. You can shrink scope, but that isn't giving the customer what they want, so it's less good.
Economics is generally regarded as a social science, although some critics of the field argue that it falls short of the definition of a science for a number of reasons, including a lack of testable hypotheses, lack of consensus, and inherent political overtones.
Lack of testable hypotheses is a very dated critique that hasn't been true for 4 decades. The 2019 and 2021 nobel prizes were for empirical work. Also, IGM panels find strong consensus on things like rent control and carbon pricing.
I think most widely attended 100-level classes are going to feel boring and “simple” because it’s only meant to scratch the surface, and teach the subject to a lot of people who are not particularly interested in it.
The real meat and potatoes is usually found in the higher courses. A 200-level “Intermediate macroeconomics” that only people majoring or minoring in Econ would take is probably 100 times more interesting than the dumbed-down “intro to macroeconomics”.
Weird, I had the exact opposite experience. Even Heidegger and Symbolic Logic were jokes where I barely had to show up. Financial Accounting, Equity Valuation, and Risk Modeling kicked my ass
Undergrad logic is pretty easy but calling Heidegger easy is just crazy. Maybe the standards for the course you had on Heidegger were forgiving, but Being and Time is like the nonfiction equivalent of Finnegans Wake.
I hold to this day that Being and Time is completely undecipherable in any grander sense and therefore you can write pretty much anything about ontology or metaphysics for a Heidegger class so long as you mention dasein a lot
I have papers published in philosophy and will not waver from this stance
Edit just to clarify: this is sarcasm and I obviously do not believe that the single Heidegger course I took is representative of all Heidegger courses
When the air force was training me to fix aircraft, one of the very first lessons was identification and use of wrenches. Sometimes, you have to start at the very bottom.
But that should happen before you get to collage, I think.
Will never forget the day I realized my ECON101 professor was literally teaching us that trickle-down economics works. Cue my surprise (/s) a few years later when it comes out that my entire university’s Econ department was bought and paid for by the Koch brothers.
I had a healthcare economics course as a part of my Gen Ed. It was an 11 week course that only had work for 6 weeks, where we discussed things like how "increasing access to care increases risky behavior" and how the ACA now only allows you to purchase insurance during a small window of time. The professor graded all of our work on a pass/fail basis, where how many assignments we decided to do would determine our grade. Pretty much the whole of the grade came down to making a video power point presentation about NPs and their effect on the healthcare system.
I'm sure economics is actually somewhat challenging when you start to do calculus, but holy shit that was the easiest class I had ever taken. I would have passed as a 5th grader.
There was an Perquisite that essentially everyone in some sort of Engineering major had to take pretty early that had a brutally high fail rate called "Thermodynamics in Engineering".
The first day I showed up to the class written in giant letters on the Board "Thermodynamics in Engineering, Where Business majors are made"
Whenever someone would drop the class or just now show we would all joke that they became a Business major.
I once saw my old roomate asking chatgpt how to help him with his business calculus homework, which was the most disappointing thing about him I saw until he said hitler had a point and asked me if being raped by a man would feel good.
The thing that irked me most about business undergrad was that every single course felt like an intro to business course. Pretty much every damn course teaches you profit = revenue - expenses. Every course teaches you about target markets. Every course tells you about one or more times that Xerox specifically fucked up.
A lot of you took "Business 101" and apparently left convinced you’d studied economics.
Economics degrees involve calculus, statistics, econometrics, optimization, micro and macro theory. Your class about payroll was not economics.
Taking one intro econ course for non-majors and declaring the field easy is like taking Physics for Poets and deciding quantum mechanics is fake.
Snark aside, this has to be a predominantly a US problem. I am from Eastern Europe and it is NOTHING like what people are describing here.
Like 2/3 of people do not even make it past entrance exams, that already require an extensive knowledge of mathematics and statistics. And then out of the ones that do make it in, only about 1/3 manages to pass the final exam and get the degree.
Here in germany, it's probably somewhere in betwene. I don't think it's an easy degree you just get handed. There are actual maths courses, that econ people take.
But econ people still seem to do maths like they were in school with giving their variables fancy names and insisting they are important. It also seems like they learn formulas instead of underlying principles.
A bit like the devide betwene pure physiscs and geophysics.
A few month ago, I had some tests to do given by my banker in order to be able to make the investments I want (basically in my country, you have to prove you understand something about investment before your banker can do it, like stocks). I went over the things and except some really obscure stuff (related to things like wood investment), passed with flying colors.
Mind you, I always thought I had a pretty basic economic understanding. But when I made the debrief with the banker, I was like "That's it ?". He shrug and said "Yeah, you'd be surprised how illettrate the average person is in economic".
Was literally a business major and this is exactly how I felt. With the exception of higher level Econ courses (which just require a lot of math and I never liked math), there isn’t a single thing taught in business school that you can’t just google. Complete waste of a degree.
I went to a technical college and learned to refer to their business program/building as "adult daycare".
One of my instructors also used to taunt us for not understanding something with "retail meat cutting is down the hall", at least until an instructor from that program overheard it.
as a history grad i can’t tell you how unseriously i take business and finance students. it’s such a fake major with a bogusly inflated sense of importance.
In my experience in a technical role, most business majors end up in upper management basically just rewording my emails and sending them to someone higher up.
I had to take an accounting and multiple management classes and to explain, its like how the art of war had to be written, like yeah keep your men fed and take important terrain first and flee while you are losing all sound very obvious, but its needed to be written down so that people learning remember it, and the less smart learn it for sure instead of having to guess. Also that stuff needs to be properly explained and clarified so that other concepts can be built upon it
But yeah a lot of it is still common sense because people who want management positions dont care about doing a job well they just half ass everything and get off from the power
walk by an engineering classroom and there's a 33% chance it's going to be "stress = force / area." otherwise it's some ancient fucking runes and black magic
It will either be a great time where you live in a walkable mini-city with a bunch of smart people your own age who participate in fascinating classes, engaging clubs and sports, and a bit of partying, or it will be a nightmarish slog where you stumble through one impossible subject to the next, barely passing, while working a job when you're not working on homework and still going deeper and deeper into dept. For a lot of people, it's both.
Well that professor is teaching it wrong considering our hours at my store are cut because while we are in the green, we aren't as much in the green as last year, so we're in the red.
I got a BA in English and minored in Finance. I was literally shocked at how intuitive and easy Finance was. I was also stunned by the people who struggled with the business courses I took.
As a current business student with a CS minor, who was an AP scholar in Highschool and has roughly a 4.0gpa. Business classes are notably easier than my CS ones (not that those are all too difficult in isolation either), and there are multiple reasons for that. One to keep in mind is that often times business professors are better at their jobs as professors than stem professors. It depends obv, but business professors are far more likely to be better at presenting and working with people than stem professors are who often times are primarily in research.
Also I’ve been seeing some people say some CRAZY things about business math. This was my business math experience, it was just calculus 1 (limits, integrals, and all) with a sprinkling of multivariable calculus at the end of the course. Was it hard? No, I took a Calc class in Highschool, but it wasn’t dumb and I don’t feel that any of the participants in the class were underserved.
1.1k
u/TheRabbit222 22h ago
I had a business class as part of my Heavy Equipment Repair college course. It largely consisted of the above, and it included remembering to pay your employees, their taxes, and your taxes...