Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by nrclark 144 days ago
Kind of reads 25 people's stories about "How I became a parasite". Why not create new things, instead of making a career out of leeching the wealth created by others?
6 comments

This isn’t really a good angle to critique finance IMO, because it is indeed a necessary part of the modern economy.

A better angle is how finance tends to acquire a ton of smart young people that could/would otherwise be doing work that has more benefits to society. It’s hard to blame the individual here, because the salaries are orders of magnitude larger in finance vs. say, aerospace engineering. Would I turn down $700k at a hedge fund to earn $90k at a science lab? Probably not, unless I was already independently wealthy.

"it's all just numbers really. Just changing what you're adding up. And, to speak freely, the money here is considerably more attractive." - Peter Sullivan in the movie Margin Call
I ended up rewatching that movie more than ten times a few months ago after I got stuck with a capped internet connection and not much to do online. It's one of those films where there isn't a single fucking scene wasted: everything plays out a little over a day, and the character dynamics and dialogue feel genuinely tight. Lots of great characters overall, but Jeremy Irons's John Tuld is just stellar in terms of presence and delivery.
It really is a perfect movie, in the sense of having precisely the right parts and nothing else.
How is that not a restatement of what OP said?
Everyone benefits with more efficient markets.

It is easy to fall into the trap of thinking HFT/low frequency quant firms "leech wealth".

You can get out of the trap by learning about what they do and the essential role they play in the proper functioning of our markets.

It's an intentionally naive position to say that places don't leech off of others. Even large places like Fidelity and Schwab that respect customers aren't just keeping people's money in vaults. They literally take your checking, savings, retirement accounts, etc. and make money off of them while they "sit".

Firms specialize in intercepting trades and then placing trades faster than 99.9% of others.

These institutions hide behind "we provide liquidity" like it's a selfless act of kindness, whereas that's just a mere side effect, and just one of many.

The entire modern financial system is layers and layers of unneeded complexity that almost solely rose out of people trying to leech money from the system. These financial institutions have built the entire system around them so that now they can say "look at how essential we are!".

> aren't just keeping people's money in vaults. They literally take your checking, savings, retirement accounts, etc. and make money off of them while they "sit". <

depending on jurisdiction and TOS, this maybe legal, but it needs to be announced somehow to the customer; a capital management firm of an ETF needs to buy the included shares, e.g; those have no money "sitting around"?

Sure, it's announced and by contract. But where else do you have to put your accounts?
It can both be true they provide a necessary service and that unfair financialization exists.

We are not in disagreement.

But it is ignorance to say the system would work better without any involvement of HFTs.

the leeches are the publicly traded companies that are listed on the stock market. Any market should be happy to have more participants, unless you like price-uncertainty.
Why not practice compassion instead of critiquing others?
Did you actually read them?

I didn't go to NYC, but Money is fungible so it's a simple math problem.

How much non-parasite good can you do making $50k/year * 10 years? Even if we ignore taxes and you donated your entire salary, that tops out at $500k worth. If instead you could make, say, $500k/year * 10 years, and then quit and form your own non-profit for $2,000,000 and do 4x as much good.

I get your point, but that was the exact logic of Effective Altruism and Sam Altman is now jailed for the Largest Fraud of All Time. It's a slippery slope.
Sam Bankman-Fried. And I think he’s a bit of a special case, others do not need to be worried they’ll succumb to multi billion dollar fraud schemes if they try to earn-to-give.
I'm not defending SBF, but I think you may not be completely taking into account how strong the pressures are on someone like that. I'm pretty sure he didn't set out to commit a multi-billion dollar fraud, he was sucked into it as a consequence of the expectations on him and so forth. My point here is just that this is a symptom of a societal problem, and SBF is just a well-positioned scapegoat.
SBF was really unusual in that he claimed to be a pure expected-utility maximiser. He admitted that he would take 51% coin-flips forever on Conversations with Tyler in March 2022, long before everything blew up:

> COWEN: Then you keep on playing the game. So, what's the chance we're left with anything? Don't I just St. Petersburg paradox you into nonexistence?

> BANKMAN-FRIED: Well, not necessarily. Maybe you St. Petersburg paradox into an enormously valuable existence. That's the other option.

I'm not saying the pressures are absent, but they are hopefully vastly less compelling for any normal person with a more standard view of risk and utility. ("Sure, I'll just cover up this little bit of fraud, because that's got a better than 50% chance of success" is a course of action SBF all but said he would take, months in advance!)

If you have a billion dollars to give me, I'm pretty sure I can manage to not to use them for outright crypto fraud. You'd have to give me a billion dollars to be sure, but I promise really hard.
Freudian slip?
If you’re only make on average 500k/year after 10y — you’re not really in the game at all
there are a lot of quants who aren't at T1 firms or in the hottest seats. plenty make less than this. obviously if you are top of class and getting headhunted by XTX, your offers will be much bigger than $500k ... but it's kind of obnoxious to claim that QRs making less than this aren't even players
The term "player" tends to imply something more than just someone employed in a field. I don't support all this insane inequality, but the other commenter is not wrong on the relative value assessment.
Feel free to do more accurate math! I don't think you'd be doing $500k right out of college either, so it was intended to be a rough average. The person I know I'm finance is doing well over $1,000,000/yr, but I have no idea how average that is.
Said on a website hosted by a major VC that specializes in Silicon Valley types of venture capital, bringing the next data collecting mobile app to your doorstep.