I could not disagree more. I worked in IT for a number of years, and I enjoyed what I did, and was also very good at it. In the 90s, I also was compensated very well for what I did, partly because I was well placed, and in IT BEFORE the boom. The H1b situation, as I mentioned in a previous post, is HUGE. It is a structural business consideration. Technical obsolesence, is a CYCLICAL business consideration. "On one hand, that stuff about IT being dead is mostly just true for the "nonbelievers" That's not a proffesional statement, its a "cultish" statement, an attitude which disparages viewing your career as a business WHICH IT IS. In addition to being good at IT, I was also a good businessman, and made no apology for it. If I were to work an additional 20-30 hours a week to get a project done for an unreasonable deadline, I was paid by the hour. "Throwing a pizza over the wall at 8:00pm" was NOT compensation "because I just love to code"
Disagree. Yes, the talk has been ongoing for many years. Now, companies are taking action rather than continuing the talk. What I am finding among my Fortune 50 clients (one of my businesses) is that the recent change in demand has forced them to rexamine their costs more closely than at anytime over the past 20 years. In most of the cases, the audits have led to new initiatives for seeking lower cost (read higher productivity) solutions to commodity skillsets and problems. The argument against offshore outsourcing was until the last couple of years stated as above. However the offshores have taken serious ateps to address these customer complaints. Yes, there are still IT jobs. Will they be good jobs over the next 5 - 10 years ? In my opinion the answer is no. With little truly new, and useful technology being developed, the standard IT job will continue to languish as a commodity whose costs need to be minimized. If you are in a true non-commodity, high demand niche (like we are) then you will continue to do well. Otherwise ....
I know there are some prop firms that will take you if you're a profitable swing trader. I think someone mentioned Green Tree in this thread. Actually, I think any of the ones that require a deposit and do a profit split will take a profitable swing trader, although you may end up paying a desk/data fee if your volume is low.
My path is much like TGregg: I started programming first Kaypros in about 1979 and then supercomputers while an undergraduate. I also worked in the markets while going to school and after. ... I couldn't believe that people would pay me to design and write programs that dealt with the markets: I thought it was the greatest thing on earth because I loved both areas. Later I spent 5 years working as a scientist doing more programming of supercomputers. The next career was as a consultant. Next I started a couple of companies. Now I manage the companies and traded full time using programs I designed. This business is continuing to build .... See a theme ? The theme is do what you love and the rest will follow. Dont worry about a failure here or there: this is how you learn. If you love it just do it and success will come in time.
Cheeks One of the options covered has been to trade prop /get backed. You then mentioned you were a swing trader. I'm curious about your expectancy and probability of being right on each trade. If it is less than 50% adding more capital to the mix will be deadly. You won't be able to survive the drawdowns at all. If you are trading a system though that has a ratio of being right more often than not more capital backing might help. Also look at some of the fee's involved. Paying $250 per month for use of capital, only taking 85% profits, paying exchange fee's , and so forth might not be in your best interest in comparison to what you will produce with more capital. I suggest drawing a list of benefits/drawbacks before taking that route. Jumping up in size from 300 shares to 3000 shares overnight for a lot of traders is deadly. You've got some thinking to do though as it seems there are a few things going on. Robert
Thanks for input Robert. I Agree, I do not think prop firms are the right route for my particular style. I really don't need more leverage. I'm almost never margined out on a retail account. Plus I tend to stay in cash alot waiting for opportunities. Not a commission generating style. However, I do plan to look into a prop firm in my area that I just learned about from another member of this board. Just in case. Thank you to everyone contributing to the thread. Your responses are much appreciated. Cheeks
My experience has been that, with the CS degree it is easier to get in the door some places. The corollary is that the CS degs are the first to go when the layoffs come around, unless they have excellent communication skills. While I'll agree that there are a _LOT_ of crappy programmers that joined the IT boom, I know a lot of CS majors (on the job) that churn out bloated, leaky, rotting VB code with the rest of them. I'm starting to doubt CS relevance for applied software engineering. If you want to join a software shop (like RATL), it might be a good idea. If you just want a stable coding job with a large company, it might not be necessary. (There are actually 3 finance-degreed coders within a 4 cube radius of me). With your waitstaff experience, you still might make more money waiting tables at the very nicest restraunt you can find, or tending bar at a club Fri & Sat.
I know for a fact that Pharmacists are in very high demand and get 85K on start in NYC area. I am not sure how long they study, either 1 or 3 years, but in any case less than for IT.
its way harder to become a pharmacist. Its harder to get into pharmacy school for one thing, and its longer. Thats why pharmacists consistently make good money, supply and demand.
Before 9/11 I did well. 40k+ easily. Unfortunately, high end fine dinning has taken a sizeable hit in this economy.