I want to go to college for either finance or accounting. I want to know what I need to know about economics, finance, and business. What are the most important books to read?
>>7726987
That would probably be the better option, however I feel that most /biz/ and /fit/ esque rec reading lists tend to consist more of self help books and surface level literature.
Just wanted another perspective from a business minded /lit/ browser
>>7726978
Investment banker here. Double majored in finance and economics. Accounting is basically glorified fact checking, so avoid that, but maybe I'm biased. My best advice is to start reading the Wall Street Journal and The Economist daily in order to learn how the markets work. Beyond that, you should pedagogical read the more important economic works, starting with smith. For more on the finance/investing side, I highly recommend starting with One Up on Wall Street by Peter Lynch, then reading The Intelligent Investor by Ben Graham. From there you can decide whether you're more interested in value investing or more quantitative methods. Avoid anything that romanticizes Wall Street (such as Michael Lewis) like the plague. Others may disagree with my last statement as typically his books are viewed as "required reading" on the street, but he is fucking god awful. Also start picking up some excel and programming skills asap. The better you are at math and stats, the better. Let me know if you have any other questions or want more specific recs. Good luck, anon.
>>7727186
Would you recommend any texts on complete basics and fundamentals to build from (can be literature or textbooks)
Only thing I can think of is Sowell.
>>7727186
lynch and graham are both very outdated at this point. value investing is in the (rapid) process of being obviated by quantitative methods
honestly you should just read a brief summary of the key points of those books in case people talk to you about it, don't bother wasting time reading them in full
>>7727186
also why the fuck are you on /lit/ if you're an ibanker?
>>7726978
if your don't own an accounting firm, don't become an accountant
you only have one life, OP
>>7727276
Why shouldn't (s)he be interested in literature?
>>7727253
Any intro corporate finance textbook will suffice. They're all basically the same at the end of the day. You should definitely start with intro microeconomics and intro macroeconomics first, then dive into basic introductory accounting, then a finance textbook.
>>7727272
Different strokes for different folks. To say value investing is dead is naive. There are still plenty of traditional L/S funds out there which do well. I agree somewhat they Lynch and graham are outdated, but nevertheless they are the gold standard introduction to investing, and that is what he asked for.
>>7727276
Because it's Sunday night and I browse 4chan while I watch TV. And I'm into /lit/, saw this thread, and figured I could help out a young anon. It's not like it's 4pm on a Wednesday aha
>>7727272
Also anon likely doesn't even know the three financial statements. You expect him to dive right into solving SDEs and writing algos in tensorflow?
>>7727332
cause ibankers usually work 80 - 100 hours a week and barely have time to do anything, including reading lit which is a fairly time consuming hobby ;[
>>7727447
>Different strokes for different folks. To say value investing is dead is naive. There are still plenty of traditional L/S funds out there which do well.
L/S funds do well because fundamental research is essentially legalized insider trading, and the room they have to work in shrinks by the day
t. i work at a l/s deep value fund
>>7727460
i think graham and lynch and the like give a very outdated view of the markets, and i think your suggestions of just reading the WSJ and economist and some intro textbooks are much better use of time.
>>7726978
Okay OP, I already see the "start with Smith" maymay appearing, so I'm going to spare you the trouble and tell you that your finance/accounting career will have little to literally nothing to do with your understanding of a two and a half century old philosophical text, and these people are trying to slip a dank meme under your nose and get you lost in wholly irrelevant text for the next month. Unless you're studying philosophy or the history of economics there should be no reason for you to pick it up.
In your finance and accounting courses you will do close to no reading and a lot of math. So, to answer your question -- as to what you should read -- don't. If you want to have a head start on other folks in your field then make sure you've got the mathematical basics down, and, if you are truly prepared, start to learn some actual accounting. Try to get an internship with real accountants or something.
Also OP, just to warn you: Someone will invariably reply to this post and mumble about the invisible hand or some other Smithian maxim, playing doomsayer, for the sole purpose of informing you about how your career is going to be forever relegated to shitcan under-the-table actuary work because you didn't thoroughly read all of Smith. Please God do not fall prey to the dank maymay.
>>7727332
>as if a banker would be a female
>>7726978
Start with the greeks.
>>7727472
>Graham and Lynch give outdated views of the markets
While that is true in some regards, I think that it is too blanketing of a statement. I'm sure value investing will be a winning strategy over the next few decades. I believe the point that you are trying to make is that many modern investors do not have investment horizons/holding periods as the capitalist kings of days past, nor do they have the ability to stomach volatility in the midst of constant information. Obviously many of their strategies may not apply well to more modern companies that don't have as many hard assets, but for a complete beginner, they are still great to learn how to think like an investor at a basic level. I'm of the opinion good investors/finance practitioners should be well rounded. The Quants should understand value investing and how it's used/why it works, and the value investors should understand the pros and cons of quantitative strategies at a higher level.
Be honest, how many of you shitpost on econjobrumors?
>>7726978
Every time I see some version of the text in OP's picture my inner monologue goes, "No, you ARE misbehaving. If you were a murderous psychopath, you wouldn't wear a button excusing yourself. Not if the society were worth living in, anyway."
"Just because you have a mental illness doesn't mean that society has to tolerate any actings-out due to your particular mental illness. That is why we have both laws and social cues, including bullying and social shaming which are designed to correct your behavior. As long as you're not flinging shit at walls or shrieking happily like a tard, we can put up with you, but if you can't maintain eye contact with anyone ever, ever, your day job will probably be low-level clerk or some specific technical function we haven't automated yet."
>>7727634
i browse it sometimes i rarely shitpost there
