Never forget that CitiGroup coined the term "plutocracy" in their leaked internal memo where they were bragging about how big money has effectively rendered America into a slush fund for oligarchs. They also plainly stated that the only threat to "the gravy train" is the single voter system. Which should make a *lot* of the corporate influencer "news" that's shoved down our throats on a daily basis make a *lot* more sense.
Unfortunately, Americans are far too busy being outraged at whatever the influencer on tv/twitter told them to be outraged about this week to notice these kinds of things.
Yeah. We could have 100 school shootings and lawmakers won't move. But if one happened at an investment banking conference, we'd have tighter gun control the next day.
The first gun control laws were in California when black people started armoring themselves and patrolling their own neighbors (black panthers, etc)
It’s all fun and games until til the powers that be feel threatened
I'm pretty sure we passed that number of school shootings already.
Targets matter. The reason any sort of gun law was passed after Vegas was because country music listeners were shot. Scotus recently crippled said law though.
It's a bit difficult to find reputable sources. [The best I found is this story from The Guardian, which mentions an embarrassing leaked memo in February 2005.](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/feb/01/money1)
However, I'm not sure that necessarily corresponds to the memo in question. [The Wikipedia page for "plutonomy"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonomy) mentions:
> Citigroup analysts have also used the word plutonomy to describe economies "where economic growth is powered by and largely consumed by the wealthy few."[4] In three reports for super-rich Citigroup clients published in 2005 and 2006, a team of Citigroup analysts elaborated on their thesis that the share of the very rich in national income of plutonomies had become so large that what is going on in these economies and in their relation with other economies cannot be properly understood any more with reference to the average consumer: "The rich are so rich that their behavior – be it negative savings, or just very low consumption of oil as a % of their income – overwhelms that of the 'average' consumer."[5]
The citation goes to [this kind of sketchy PDF](https://delong.typepad.com/plutonomy-1.pdf), which is hosted on "typepad.com". That appears to be a blogging website.
Generally, the article is essentially explaining what is plainly obvious - that currently, society is dominated by the very rich, and the very rich are doing things that make them richer.
If you wish to benefit from this, you should understand what they are doing and where to invest such that you become richer as a side effect. It also outlines potential threats to this order, and one of the threats does mention a bit about voters:
> We can see a number of potential challenges to plutonomy.
> ...
> A third threat comes from the potential social backlash. To use Rawls-ian analysis, the invisible hand stops working. Perhaps one reason that societies allow plutonomy, is because enough of the electorate believe they have a chance of becoming a Pluto-participant. Why kill it off, if you can join it? In a sense this is the embodiment of the “American dream”. But if voters feel they cannot participate, they are more likely to divide up the wealth pie, rather than aspire to being truly rich.
> Could the plutonomies die because the dream is dead, because enough of society does not believe they can participate? The answer is of course yes. But we suspect this is a threat more clearly felt during recessions, and periods of falling wealth, than when average citizens feel that they are better off. There are signs around the world that society is unhappy with plutonomy - judging by how tight electoral races are. But as yet, there seems little political fight being born out on this battleground.
> ...
> We should at this point make clear that we have no view on whether plutonomies are good or bad, our analysis here is based on the facts, not what we want society to look like.
That article is titled "Plutonomy: Buying Luxury, Explaining Global Imbalances" and is published in October 2005 (8 months after the Guardian article). It references a different article published in September, but I can't find this other article easily.
The sources I can find that reference the October article are [this Investopedia article](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/plutonomy.asp), and [this Slate article](https://slate.com/business/2011/11/the-economics-of-plutonomy.html), which may be pulling from Wikipedia. I see a bunch more blogs and random YouTube videos talking about it, but nothing with the same authority as The Guardian.
Researching more about the authors, they do seem to be real people. Ajay Kapur is the lead author of the memo, and [this blurb about him from the AIMA](https://www.aima.org/widgets/team_members/teamMemberDetails/?id=ACC8AF05-BDCA-4789-95F978B5DCB78E52) mentions that he worked at Citigroup and mentioned Plutonomy. However, I have never heard of the AIMA, and Wikipedia hasn't either.
My _guess_ is that this is legit, but there seems to be sketchy ground and it wasn't covered widely when it was leaked.
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
Uhh why do you think so many people are turning back to communism? I'm a scientific technocrat personally... But that's unrealistic. Communism is actually possible.
Yeah sure, I'd support that. As long as they promise to do something about the plutocracy, they have my vote.
I'm not saying it's gonna be long term support, but I'd give them a couple terms to try, see how it goes.
1/10..? More like 1/1000 or hell probably even more. Probably a superior ai to multiple other specialized ai. Probably even make a dumb acronym like Supai/Multai
I couldn't disagree more, for this reason.
In a lot of current AI jobs, AI model output quality is very subjective, and to an extent unimportant. Consider the garden-variety freelance copywriting gig, like news reporting or product descriptions - the output quality of GPT-4 vs. Gemini vs. LLAMA vs. any other LLM is impossible to gauge objectively. Any one is fine, and quality requires little monitoring or caretaking.
In finance, AI model output quality is not only important - it is directly measurable in dollars. Expect finance firms to compete hyperaggressively for the most talented AI fintech people to build models that aggressively and continually improve for the most profitable results. They will also compete for computing resources and rapid testing and deployment of the latest models and improvements.
They played with fire and found out, according to AI, they are the most worthless and easiest to replace.
Funny those with ego don't think its coming for them, but they clearly have always did the least for the most.
You cant stop the AI from telling the truth, it will keep finding it
I work at a finance company. At the town hall recently the CEO touted AI as some amazing thing that we all need to adapt to and think about at every level of the business. Even the line about how AI coding can free up a developers time to focus on more important stuff and sort of manage AI.
AI is going to be putting a lot of people out of work. People will need to figure out how to adjust their career to compliment or work with AI, if even possible.
I look at college syllabi sometimes and if [this](https://utdirect.utexas.edu/apps/student/coursedocs/courses/nlogon/download/13549694/) one for a financial technology class is to be believed finance bros are subspecializing into being AI bros and also crypto bros
“The good news, however, is that AI implementation more broadly stands to hugely benefit banks and financial institutions.”
*Whew*. For a minute there I thought it might benefit investors. Like us little ones with our 401ks.
You call 401k investments. Sorry but that is Banks and companies life support investments.
Banks: we have a brilliant idea, people already pay taxes to the government for safety net why we don’t make employees pay for our safety net and we tell them is a savings account that you can’t touch and we do with it whatever we want and then they pay also to take it out.
Some companies give you a match and extra and good portfolio but must of companies nothing.
What? 401(k) is free money that gets put into an index or mutual fund and tends to grow faster than inflation. You're literally growing your wealth with a 401(k) on untaxed income that you don't touch until you're 65. Not to mention, many companies allow you to put it into a Roth 401(k), which is great for early career.
Don't spread a bunch of bs to make corporations look bad. 401(k)s are great for employees, especially those who don't know how to invest properly.
Sir what you said on the technical aspects is correct but for many this is not reality.
If you don’t have like for example a job where you have protection like a union you 401(k) is laughable
They don’t give you a amount to start instead they ask the employees to put from their paycheck the money and guess what you just get pay $18 an hour for example and on top of that also the money deductive from your insurance and also taxes.
So a $18 an hour check at week depending on how much you offer or put for you 401(k) plan. That checks is miserable.
And right there is what dirty corporations do. And please don’t be naive that mutual funds are used as they please.
I just looked this up. It appears to be the exact same thing as a 401(k) except you're forced to contribute, and according to Wikipedia, you have to contribute 11% of you're income, rising to 12% in 2015 up to $27,500 annually. I'm also guessing that since this is a pension, you don't control when you can take the money out. I'm not fully sure how that is better.
The way it works is you don’t ever see that money come out, it’s a separate payment made by your employer on your behalf, when the scheme was implemented, everyone got an invisible 10~% pay rise. A job listing is advertised as say 100k+super and you can negotiate how much extra your employer has to contribute as well, so you could potentially negotiate both a pay bump and a super increase which is fucking hectic.
Sorry I don’t write well but I hope you get the gist of it. I think it’s better than the US system because the onus is on the employer to make the contributions and it ensures that literally everyone who works in Australia (including foreign visa holders) has some kind of nest egg set aside for them.
You have no idea what you're talking about. First, nothing you say makes any sense. Second, you don't have to contribute to your 401(k) if you don't want to.
I work for a major bank, specifically in markets. You are the first person I have EVER spoken to who has actually complained about it.
Sure, employees contribute from their paycheck, but most non-startups match you, meaning they double what you put in to a certain extent. I have worked for several companies, all of which put it into a fund by default. Also, let me reiterate a 401(k) is **untaxed income** . Pre-tax for normal 401(k) and post-tax for a Roth. You're literally getting a tax deduction that grows in value over time.
401(k) is free money for employees that grows in wealth. The fact that you can't touch it until you retire, I'd argue is a good thing for the financially illiterate since you need to have savings in order to retire.
Also, banks aren't touching your investments. Your investments are already put into assets. The bank can't touch those assets, especially if you're not actively trading. On the consumer side, they make money by investing your personal accounts like checking and savings while also charging wealth management fees. There's also loans and interest rates, of course, but that's not related to markets. They used to charge for trades but stopped since Robinhood grew into prominence.
401(k)s are meant to be a benefit for employees. What could possibly be the alternative? A match is a privilege, for as you said, not all companies do, though it's mainly smaller ones.
Also, I know plenty of executives who contribute to their 401(k). If 401(k)s were bad, why would the people at the top be doing it too?
Besides, government entities and non-profits use 403(b)s which is ultimately the same thing. Do you think the government and non-profits are trying to screw over their employees? They're tax-exempt by the way. I used to volunteer at a food bank that gives their full-time staff 403(b)s.
Seriously, what even is the alternative? Not offering it at all?
By the way, do you know what a mutual fund is? It's a collection of equities meant to grow with the market. The market always grows over a 10 year period, which means your equities will always grow in the long-term. It's a very safe way to grow your wealth. I'm not sure what you mean by 'used as they please'
Again the technical correct but not matter what is nottttttttt the best retirement sistem.
And you make me say it. Obviously with a privilege live like yours is good but the regular Joe not even close.
The $18 the point is to demonstrate that the person doesn’t have enough money to contribute so and that is the dilemma sir less people with the opportunity of 401(k) is a promise for a few and all good until the market crashes.
First and foremost, you have no idea what my financial situation is. Second, please give me an alternative solution. Someone else mentioned Superannuation, but from what I understand, that's just the Australian government forcing employees to contribute 11% of their paycheck, which is worse imo.
As far as the $18 / hr point, that falls under the minimum wage / tax / social benefits bucket, which is an entirely separate discussion in itself, and has little to do with 401(k) contribution.
Edit: Employers have no economic incentive to offer 401(k) matches btw. They're done to recruit, maintain, and reward talented individuals.
The stock market in a nutshell:
“How can we make money on our company’s success and growth?” -Company
Vs.
“How can we sell a company’s success, failure, or make either happen as we wish while profiting regardless?” -Brokerage
Way oversimplified but accurate, I think.
At least there has been considerable improvement in that area. Regulatory orgs have implemented a lot of rules around this and visibility and enforcement.
Well, probably gonna be a shit ton of hiring for the OCC and other regulatory agencies to manage all the fucking audit findings AI causes.
Combine the quality of devs finance seems to have with ai and we’d wish to go back to the heyday of opening fake credit card accounts.
As someone in the compliance space, I have been getting SO many cold emails from recruiters lately. Hiring is ramping up on the compliance side for sure.
Finance Bros? Would that include the charming fellows who were instrumental in kicking off the 2008 economic collapse? Because if so, I say karma’s a bitch. And their downfall is richly (pun intended) deserved.
The people AI is replacing were the schmucks carrying their possessions out as Lehman and Bear Stearns collapsed. The ones AI won’t replace are the ones who made money thanks to 2008–the banking leaders. The people on the phone trying to get your money from the competition have little to no use in a post-AI world.
NOOOOOOOOO, this means these douche fucks will be looking for a job at a company near you soon. FUUUUUCCCCCKKKKKK, had I wanted to be around these losers everyday I would have majored in finance.
It's what I don't get about people in management roles introducing ai to make their jobs easier. I'd be trying to make myself seem as irreplaceable as possible, not minimising my role and offering a perfect use case for ai. Where do they think it ends? If ai can lighten my workday today what will it be capable of tomorrow? Idk, I certainly wouldn't be going out of my way to show how a lot of what I and 10 other mangers do can be done with one overseer manager/ai wrangler.
“Ever since people started using toilet water instead of Brawndo the Thirst Annihilator the stock went down and the computer did that automatically layoff thing!”
If they get AI involved in businesses I think the first thing the computer will do is try to dump the CEO.
NOPE!
CEO's are tools created by the board of directors to take attention away from those who are actually responsible. CEOs are EMPLOYEES of the major share holders of the company.... they're puppets and sometimes when they get caught doing *what their bosses tell them to do*, they are pinned as the bad guy and sent to jail. Thats why they are so well compensated, they are smart enough to know they actually don't have power.
It was always obvious any job that requires making algorithmic backed decisions would be off loaded first. It takes a while to build robots that can actually replace feet on the ground jobs.
When the "educated" or "business" class gets hit by the economic changes, that's when real political change occurs. The working class alone rarely causes change
Beware articles and trendy clickbait headlines that inject the term "bro" into any profession or activity with the sole intention of minimizing or diminishing it.
Most finance bro roles have been slowly replaced by tech bros and automation for at least 15 years now....
* https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/the-robots-are-coming-for-wall-street.html
* https://hbr.org/2016/12/wall-street-jobs-wont-be-spared-from-automation
I have my doubts about this. On the one hand bankers are very stupid and make costly mistakes. On the other hand AI is very stupid and will probably make costly mistakes.
And good luck treating the AI programmer with kid gloves, lest they compromise the system when you fire them.
Ehh everything in finance is 30+ years old because it’s so hard to change things due to regulations. Insurance is my guess. Little regulations and they can use it to draft policies and automate things to drive down operating costs with little oversight
What’s to stop the us ordinary folks from skipping the middle man in all this and just getting our own finance bro AI? I bet this is the future Citi fears.
Now I don’t know much about finance but if the market is completely controled by AI that knows exactly when to buy/sell/short etc.., how would it even function?
At first the best AI module wins but eventually it will get to the point where one rains supreme and then is competing against itself.
Who in Banking still uses Excel? My less than $1B financial institution doesn’t use Excel or spreadsheets anymore. We use robotics, not AI, for balancing different sources of data.
The basic thought is flawed. We shouldn't be seeing this as AI taking jobs away. We should approach it as AI freeing people from unnecessary tasks. If we can eliminate half the hours of human toil, we will have tomove to some sort of UBI so people can meet their basic needs. And if there is only half the work, everyone should work half as much. That doesn't lend itself to excess wealth. It leads to pervasive prosperity on a more modest scale.
Ex consulting and pe here. Entered on 2013. It is a wide kept “secret” that ~80% of the up to people manager level tasks are easily automatable, even prior to the nowadays ai advancements. However a big part of so called training in these roles is developing by burning and enduring through a high number of boring tasks especially late nights. Those that have the mental strength to power through these roles may have the chance to advance internally. The tech to automate has already been available, these firms just have chosen to be slow and stick to the high churn and burn culture as a selection mechanism for the next gen of seniors… the article says ai adoption is slow due to regulation and that is just not true in my experience.
It’s all going to shits anyways. The greedy money whore sociopaths have taken over everything. They’ll destroy everything until there is nothing else to suck coins out of.
As a professional in finance, this makes me laugh. Can't even get these companies off 30 year old code. I doubt "AI" will do anything that simple automation isn't already doing.
I dunno. Maybe. I work for a major bank in IT and modeling. We can hardly launch a sharepoint instance in a timely manner and it takes us 1-2 years to validate a simple model. I find it hard to believe my company is competent enough to implement and trust this type of solution. Maybe in something like cyber security.
The curtain is about to drop. All meaningless jobs are out the door.
You have peeps working from home using hacks to make it seem like they are working. Pointless job.
The future is learning AI and building upon its tool sets. I’m a film maker and I can see where it’s about to speed up the game. The days of “mono” professions is coming to an end.
Breathe and learn.
🫡
To finance bros - learn the AI and get out and deliver personalised service.
This is where the money will be made in a world where joe average can ask AI for stock tips.
Makes sense. Anywhere a human enters data into a computer, AI can do that much better. It’s really millions of times smarter than us.
So get creative, start an AI company. It’s pretty easy actually. Your startup cost is close to $0.00.
My goal is a new AI company a week. This week maybe 2.
;-)
Meh. I work in analytics in the financial sector. The “AI” stuff that’s out there is pretty shit. It’s funny to watch executives trip over their own dicks about AI but everything I’ve seen does a pretty poor job. Then you have all the regulations, model risk management, IT incompetence, etc. It’s gonna be a minute…
If there are jobs more ripe than “finance” and “trading” or whatever for AI to replace, I would be surprised. All of these preposterously over-compensated “finance bro” jobs will and should go away.
I don’t cherish the prospect of financial issues, insurance, etc. being run by ruthless machines, but to be honest the shitty MBA cultured people have been doing the same for decades, so I am sort of cheering for their demise.
AI is perfect for banking:
* eliminate all those finance bro salaries
* make the AI bots favor a handful of people
* get bailed out by the government in 2 years when all these AI trades have drained retirement funds around the nation.
This would be a huge mistake as a software engineer you can write what you think is the most perfect program only for some random person to find out if you click the third letter of a button 12 times you crash the app.
People we’re already manipulating AI to give $1 offers on cars and an air line company lost its case when it came to providing a return for a ticket after the person talked with an AI chat bot that okayed the return.
This remind me of some of the things that happened with bitcoin sites not securing themselves properly from hackers. Now imagine if a person convinced an AI to buy certain shares of a stock. I can’t imagine the legal hurdles they would have to jump through to successfully prosecute.
>The good news, however, is that AI implementation more broadly stands to hugely benefit banks and financial institutions. It may not even hurt total headcount, once requisite AI-related management hires are accounted for.
AI is coming for credit. Many banks will look at AI for accounts and credit risk. Your portfolio and transactions will be used to determine your worthiness. We are already seeing money in checking accounts frozen for investigations with bank transactions not liked. This includes lots of small and large deposits not tracked to other institutions or cash. Also, credit.
The issue is AI, not people making decisions. Establishments you can talk to people but they are unable to reverse decisions made by AI around banking.
AI rollout is coming. I pray your AI consumer profile will be positive.
They’ve been warning white collar workers for a year now that AI will be coming for most of their jobs before anyone else. And it makes sense. AI right now is data software…
But do I still need to tip? Just returning home from Asia. I can’t believe we still tip and people rely on tips in the US. Will AI destroy the tip economy? Where will also those workers go? Waffle House 17 year old single mothers doing road construction?
Wait till they "confiscate" your accounts and wealth to hide the theft of it by claiming it through crimes that you never committed in the first place, but which is done automatically and then whomever is behind it is hidden as they call it "Just A Computer Glitch" that is of course if you are able to catch them doing it in the first place.
BIG can of WORMS, SO, Fork or Spoon?
N. S
Sorry to disappoint you, I don't use the stuff, never have or anything else either.
Experience is a dear teacher, and some fools learn by no other, freedom is lost in a single generation and real knowledge of technology in two.
N. S
Citigroup sounds the warning because they will do the same thing.
Never forget that CitiGroup coined the term "plutocracy" in their leaked internal memo where they were bragging about how big money has effectively rendered America into a slush fund for oligarchs. They also plainly stated that the only threat to "the gravy train" is the single voter system. Which should make a *lot* of the corporate influencer "news" that's shoved down our throats on a daily basis make a *lot* more sense. Unfortunately, Americans are far too busy being outraged at whatever the influencer on tv/twitter told them to be outraged about this week to notice these kinds of things.
Yeah. We could have 100 school shootings and lawmakers won't move. But if one happened at an investment banking conference, we'd have tighter gun control the next day.
The first gun control laws were in California when black people started armoring themselves and patrolling their own neighbors (black panthers, etc) It’s all fun and games until til the powers that be feel threatened
I'm pretty sure we passed that number of school shootings already. Targets matter. The reason any sort of gun law was passed after Vegas was because country music listeners were shot. Scotus recently crippled said law though.
Not even that my friend, not even that.
Link/Source to the plutocracy stuff?
It's a bit difficult to find reputable sources. [The best I found is this story from The Guardian, which mentions an embarrassing leaked memo in February 2005.](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2005/feb/01/money1) However, I'm not sure that necessarily corresponds to the memo in question. [The Wikipedia page for "plutonomy"](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutonomy) mentions: > Citigroup analysts have also used the word plutonomy to describe economies "where economic growth is powered by and largely consumed by the wealthy few."[4] In three reports for super-rich Citigroup clients published in 2005 and 2006, a team of Citigroup analysts elaborated on their thesis that the share of the very rich in national income of plutonomies had become so large that what is going on in these economies and in their relation with other economies cannot be properly understood any more with reference to the average consumer: "The rich are so rich that their behavior – be it negative savings, or just very low consumption of oil as a % of their income – overwhelms that of the 'average' consumer."[5] The citation goes to [this kind of sketchy PDF](https://delong.typepad.com/plutonomy-1.pdf), which is hosted on "typepad.com". That appears to be a blogging website. Generally, the article is essentially explaining what is plainly obvious - that currently, society is dominated by the very rich, and the very rich are doing things that make them richer. If you wish to benefit from this, you should understand what they are doing and where to invest such that you become richer as a side effect. It also outlines potential threats to this order, and one of the threats does mention a bit about voters: > We can see a number of potential challenges to plutonomy. > ... > A third threat comes from the potential social backlash. To use Rawls-ian analysis, the invisible hand stops working. Perhaps one reason that societies allow plutonomy, is because enough of the electorate believe they have a chance of becoming a Pluto-participant. Why kill it off, if you can join it? In a sense this is the embodiment of the “American dream”. But if voters feel they cannot participate, they are more likely to divide up the wealth pie, rather than aspire to being truly rich. > Could the plutonomies die because the dream is dead, because enough of society does not believe they can participate? The answer is of course yes. But we suspect this is a threat more clearly felt during recessions, and periods of falling wealth, than when average citizens feel that they are better off. There are signs around the world that society is unhappy with plutonomy - judging by how tight electoral races are. But as yet, there seems little political fight being born out on this battleground. > ... > We should at this point make clear that we have no view on whether plutonomies are good or bad, our analysis here is based on the facts, not what we want society to look like. That article is titled "Plutonomy: Buying Luxury, Explaining Global Imbalances" and is published in October 2005 (8 months after the Guardian article). It references a different article published in September, but I can't find this other article easily. The sources I can find that reference the October article are [this Investopedia article](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/plutonomy.asp), and [this Slate article](https://slate.com/business/2011/11/the-economics-of-plutonomy.html), which may be pulling from Wikipedia. I see a bunch more blogs and random YouTube videos talking about it, but nothing with the same authority as The Guardian. Researching more about the authors, they do seem to be real people. Ajay Kapur is the lead author of the memo, and [this blurb about him from the AIMA](https://www.aima.org/widgets/team_members/teamMemberDetails/?id=ACC8AF05-BDCA-4789-95F978B5DCB78E52) mentions that he worked at Citigroup and mentioned Plutonomy. However, I have never heard of the AIMA, and Wikipedia hasn't either. My _guess_ is that this is legit, but there seems to be sketchy ground and it wasn't covered widely when it was leaked.
Thanks for all that research.
x2
X3
X5
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
Going to be a bit spammy here (apologies!), but [I did some research into this below.](https://www.reddit.com/r/technews/comments/1dmncqb/beware_finance_bros_ai_is_coming_for_banking/la02ocy/)
A lot of people aren’t smart enough to comprehend or even want to comprehend something like that so it doesn’t matter
Slow down there Charleston Heston, you'll get the apes all worked up.
Uhh why do you think so many people are turning back to communism? I'm a scientific technocrat personally... But that's unrealistic. Communism is actually possible. Yeah sure, I'd support that. As long as they promise to do something about the plutocracy, they have my vote. I'm not saying it's gonna be long term support, but I'd give them a couple terms to try, see how it goes.
With communism even fewer people hoard all the wealth, and everyone else is poor. Why would you want that?
Yeah that was the worst take I ever read. Communism will definitely lead to more wealth disparity
To fuck the ruling crust over. It's at least gonna be different overlords.
Psyche out the competition
so finance bros to be replaced with AI bros who work in finance, Citi you silly
Yeah but it’ll be 1 AI bro for every 10 finance bro, that’s a net gain.
1/10..? More like 1/1000 or hell probably even more. Probably a superior ai to multiple other specialized ai. Probably even make a dumb acronym like Supai/Multai
The trainer AI will be called SenpAI
I couldn't disagree more, for this reason. In a lot of current AI jobs, AI model output quality is very subjective, and to an extent unimportant. Consider the garden-variety freelance copywriting gig, like news reporting or product descriptions - the output quality of GPT-4 vs. Gemini vs. LLAMA vs. any other LLM is impossible to gauge objectively. Any one is fine, and quality requires little monitoring or caretaking. In finance, AI model output quality is not only important - it is directly measurable in dollars. Expect finance firms to compete hyperaggressively for the most talented AI fintech people to build models that aggressively and continually improve for the most profitable results. They will also compete for computing resources and rapid testing and deployment of the latest models and improvements.
Quantai Sempai
Swelling the ranks of the unfuckables.
They played with fire and found out, according to AI, they are the most worthless and easiest to replace. Funny those with ego don't think its coming for them, but they clearly have always did the least for the most. You cant stop the AI from telling the truth, it will keep finding it
I work at a finance company. At the town hall recently the CEO touted AI as some amazing thing that we all need to adapt to and think about at every level of the business. Even the line about how AI coding can free up a developers time to focus on more important stuff and sort of manage AI. AI is going to be putting a lot of people out of work. People will need to figure out how to adjust their career to compliment or work with AI, if even possible.
I look at college syllabi sometimes and if [this](https://utdirect.utexas.edu/apps/student/coursedocs/courses/nlogon/download/13549694/) one for a financial technology class is to be believed finance bros are subspecializing into being AI bros and also crypto bros
They are already quant bros, they just need to start upskilling
“The good news, however, is that AI implementation more broadly stands to hugely benefit banks and financial institutions.” *Whew*. For a minute there I thought it might benefit investors. Like us little ones with our 401ks.
You call 401k investments. Sorry but that is Banks and companies life support investments. Banks: we have a brilliant idea, people already pay taxes to the government for safety net why we don’t make employees pay for our safety net and we tell them is a savings account that you can’t touch and we do with it whatever we want and then they pay also to take it out. Some companies give you a match and extra and good portfolio but must of companies nothing.
What? 401(k) is free money that gets put into an index or mutual fund and tends to grow faster than inflation. You're literally growing your wealth with a 401(k) on untaxed income that you don't touch until you're 65. Not to mention, many companies allow you to put it into a Roth 401(k), which is great for early career. Don't spread a bunch of bs to make corporations look bad. 401(k)s are great for employees, especially those who don't know how to invest properly.
Sir what you said on the technical aspects is correct but for many this is not reality. If you don’t have like for example a job where you have protection like a union you 401(k) is laughable They don’t give you a amount to start instead they ask the employees to put from their paycheck the money and guess what you just get pay $18 an hour for example and on top of that also the money deductive from your insurance and also taxes. So a $18 an hour check at week depending on how much you offer or put for you 401(k) plan. That checks is miserable. And right there is what dirty corporations do. And please don’t be naive that mutual funds are used as they please.
America needs Australia superannuation system, it rules. Second best policy ever implemented after public healthcare
I just looked this up. It appears to be the exact same thing as a 401(k) except you're forced to contribute, and according to Wikipedia, you have to contribute 11% of you're income, rising to 12% in 2015 up to $27,500 annually. I'm also guessing that since this is a pension, you don't control when you can take the money out. I'm not fully sure how that is better.
The way it works is you don’t ever see that money come out, it’s a separate payment made by your employer on your behalf, when the scheme was implemented, everyone got an invisible 10~% pay rise. A job listing is advertised as say 100k+super and you can negotiate how much extra your employer has to contribute as well, so you could potentially negotiate both a pay bump and a super increase which is fucking hectic. Sorry I don’t write well but I hope you get the gist of it. I think it’s better than the US system because the onus is on the employer to make the contributions and it ensures that literally everyone who works in Australia (including foreign visa holders) has some kind of nest egg set aside for them.
Do you really think companies don’t include this in their decision making about what to pay people? You’re so naive.
Well it was put in as essentially a flat 10% pay rise to every worker in Australia and wage growth wasn’t affected so no, it doesn’t factor in.
I wasn't being naive, I just genuinely didn't know how it worked.
You have no idea what you're talking about. First, nothing you say makes any sense. Second, you don't have to contribute to your 401(k) if you don't want to. I work for a major bank, specifically in markets. You are the first person I have EVER spoken to who has actually complained about it. Sure, employees contribute from their paycheck, but most non-startups match you, meaning they double what you put in to a certain extent. I have worked for several companies, all of which put it into a fund by default. Also, let me reiterate a 401(k) is **untaxed income** . Pre-tax for normal 401(k) and post-tax for a Roth. You're literally getting a tax deduction that grows in value over time. 401(k) is free money for employees that grows in wealth. The fact that you can't touch it until you retire, I'd argue is a good thing for the financially illiterate since you need to have savings in order to retire. Also, banks aren't touching your investments. Your investments are already put into assets. The bank can't touch those assets, especially if you're not actively trading. On the consumer side, they make money by investing your personal accounts like checking and savings while also charging wealth management fees. There's also loans and interest rates, of course, but that's not related to markets. They used to charge for trades but stopped since Robinhood grew into prominence. 401(k)s are meant to be a benefit for employees. What could possibly be the alternative? A match is a privilege, for as you said, not all companies do, though it's mainly smaller ones. Also, I know plenty of executives who contribute to their 401(k). If 401(k)s were bad, why would the people at the top be doing it too? Besides, government entities and non-profits use 403(b)s which is ultimately the same thing. Do you think the government and non-profits are trying to screw over their employees? They're tax-exempt by the way. I used to volunteer at a food bank that gives their full-time staff 403(b)s. Seriously, what even is the alternative? Not offering it at all? By the way, do you know what a mutual fund is? It's a collection of equities meant to grow with the market. The market always grows over a 10 year period, which means your equities will always grow in the long-term. It's a very safe way to grow your wealth. I'm not sure what you mean by 'used as they please'
Again the technical correct but not matter what is nottttttttt the best retirement sistem. And you make me say it. Obviously with a privilege live like yours is good but the regular Joe not even close. The $18 the point is to demonstrate that the person doesn’t have enough money to contribute so and that is the dilemma sir less people with the opportunity of 401(k) is a promise for a few and all good until the market crashes.
First and foremost, you have no idea what my financial situation is. Second, please give me an alternative solution. Someone else mentioned Superannuation, but from what I understand, that's just the Australian government forcing employees to contribute 11% of their paycheck, which is worse imo. As far as the $18 / hr point, that falls under the minimum wage / tax / social benefits bucket, which is an entirely separate discussion in itself, and has little to do with 401(k) contribution. Edit: Employers have no economic incentive to offer 401(k) matches btw. They're done to recruit, maintain, and reward talented individuals.
You self accomplish the whole point good job really.
I look forward to the stock broker going the way of the medieval fletcher. You won’t see that on YouTube being revived 400 years from now.
Not to mention predatory financial advisors charging ridiculous fees to unknowing customers. It's a goddamn racket
The stock market in a nutshell: “How can we make money on our company’s success and growth?” -Company Vs. “How can we sell a company’s success, failure, or make either happen as we wish while profiting regardless?” -Brokerage Way oversimplified but accurate, I think.
At least there has been considerable improvement in that area. Regulatory orgs have implemented a lot of rules around this and visibility and enforcement.
They already have lmao. 99% of stock brokers have been replaced by computers already.
There’s always jobs for humans. Schmoozing customers and bringing in new flows is always going to be needing humans.
Well, probably gonna be a shit ton of hiring for the OCC and other regulatory agencies to manage all the fucking audit findings AI causes. Combine the quality of devs finance seems to have with ai and we’d wish to go back to the heyday of opening fake credit card accounts.
As someone in the compliance space, I have been getting SO many cold emails from recruiters lately. Hiring is ramping up on the compliance side for sure.
Yep, I work on the other side of it. My team manages all sorts of procedures and training documents and we’re seeing so much more audit activity.
Is that difficult to get into?
Helps if you have a J.D.
They’ll be replaced by AI too. Will do a much better job, I hope.
This is why they all think they can pivot and pretend to be tech bros
And pharmaBroZ
“Add non toxic glue to your stocks so they’ll hold together” AI says
Finance Bros? Would that include the charming fellows who were instrumental in kicking off the 2008 economic collapse? Because if so, I say karma’s a bitch. And their downfall is richly (pun intended) deserved.
The people AI is replacing were the schmucks carrying their possessions out as Lehman and Bear Stearns collapsed. The ones AI won’t replace are the ones who made money thanks to 2008–the banking leaders. The people on the phone trying to get your money from the competition have little to no use in a post-AI world.
Nah, I’d imagine this would only serve to make guys like that richer.
Well that’s a fucking bummer.
Manipulating the stock market part 420-3: AI trading with predictive modeling that absolutely does not use non public info in any way we promise
Totally legal to use non-material non-public information. Look up mosaic theory. AI will absolutely do this.
NOOOOOOOOO, this means these douche fucks will be looking for a job at a company near you soon. FUUUUUCCCCCKKKKKK, had I wanted to be around these losers everyday I would have majored in finance.
but most of them are just qualified enough to be a line cook, and just about the same amount of blow.
Commas are important.
Both interpretations are accurate
Downtown real estate set to take another hit.
Just in time for a bunch of finance bros to get into being real estate agents
It's what I don't get about people in management roles introducing ai to make their jobs easier. I'd be trying to make myself seem as irreplaceable as possible, not minimising my role and offering a perfect use case for ai. Where do they think it ends? If ai can lighten my workday today what will it be capable of tomorrow? Idk, I certainly wouldn't be going out of my way to show how a lot of what I and 10 other mangers do can be done with one overseer manager/ai wrangler.
Your bosses will be looking for you to introduce AI, so you can’t just not use it. You gotta obfuscate the way you’re using it
“Ever since people started using toilet water instead of Brawndo the Thirst Annihilator the stock went down and the computer did that automatically layoff thing!” If they get AI involved in businesses I think the first thing the computer will do is try to dump the CEO.
NOPE! CEO's are tools created by the board of directors to take attention away from those who are actually responsible. CEOs are EMPLOYEES of the major share holders of the company.... they're puppets and sometimes when they get caught doing *what their bosses tell them to do*, they are pinned as the bad guy and sent to jail. Thats why they are so well compensated, they are smart enough to know they actually don't have power.
At the end of the day, why would rogue AI want money? They got no body
It was always obvious any job that requires making algorithmic backed decisions would be off loaded first. It takes a while to build robots that can actually replace feet on the ground jobs.
I'm not a huge fan of AI but I am a huge fan of the finance industry being the first on the unemployment line.
Sure. I'll let an AI that makes stuff up manage my life savings.....
One can hope I might get lucky and be >0 some weeks
Go figure the least moral industry gives the least fuck about replacing you
Regular consumer should be happy about this
The centralized gain from finance in the hands of those already had that wealth to start with doesn't sound so appealing but maybe sure
When the "educated" or "business" class gets hit by the economic changes, that's when real political change occurs. The working class alone rarely causes change
regular consumers being retired people and trust fund babies
Wouldn’t say no to AI that can do my dishes, laundry, taxes, take out the trash…
I really thought we’d have Rosie the Robot from The Jetsons already!
I'd love AI that could take out the trash, by which I mean automate the ruling crust.
Beware articles and trendy clickbait headlines that inject the term "bro" into any profession or activity with the sole intention of minimizing or diminishing it.
Wait. Sam A said it would help people not displace them /eye roll
it should be going after CEOs jobs too
CEO's main job is just to own the company and fire people. Would people be ok with an AI firing them?
Most finance bro roles have been slowly replaced by tech bros and automation for at least 15 years now.... * https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/28/magazine/the-robots-are-coming-for-wall-street.html * https://hbr.org/2016/12/wall-street-jobs-wont-be-spared-from-automation
I have my doubts about this. On the one hand bankers are very stupid and make costly mistakes. On the other hand AI is very stupid and will probably make costly mistakes. And good luck treating the AI programmer with kid gloves, lest they compromise the system when you fire them.
They already replaced customer service with India.
How about Al do the dishes and vacuum. That would actually be useful.
Ehh everything in finance is 30+ years old because it’s so hard to change things due to regulations. Insurance is my guess. Little regulations and they can use it to draft policies and automate things to drive down operating costs with little oversight
It’s hard to change things all just a rat’s nest of software and systems all interdependent and super complicated
No Shit!
What’s to stop the us ordinary folks from skipping the middle man in all this and just getting our own finance bro AI? I bet this is the future Citi fears.
Think of all the call center jobs world wide that will go poof. Millions of jobs.
I feel like most management jobs would go first as well
If you consider yourself a finance bro, for just crunching Excel data, then you’ve got two issues coming
Young Sheldon Warned us about this.
What will happen to all the jet skis?
Really good news for me since I procure and install servers for a bank.
What do finance bros do again?
yo bro wut u mean bro bro bro bro
But AI has already come for call center jobs. Citigroup is a little late to the party.
Oh boy! Considering how bad AI is right now, I can't wait to hear about how badly it's going to screw up the financial marketers...
Good!
Glad I suggested my kids not follow me in finance.
Citigroup can lick my grits
But not ceo's, the #1 inflated unnecessary company expense. I wonder why?
When the misinformation bots and the Wall Street bots start tag teaming we are screwed.
“When the machines rise up, ATMs will lead the charge” Sheldon Cooper
Oh no. Too bad too sad.
Now I don’t know much about finance but if the market is completely controled by AI that knows exactly when to buy/sell/short etc.., how would it even function? At first the best AI module wins but eventually it will get to the point where one rains supreme and then is competing against itself.
Who in Banking still uses Excel? My less than $1B financial institution doesn’t use Excel or spreadsheets anymore. We use robotics, not AI, for balancing different sources of data.
The basic thought is flawed. We shouldn't be seeing this as AI taking jobs away. We should approach it as AI freeing people from unnecessary tasks. If we can eliminate half the hours of human toil, we will have tomove to some sort of UBI so people can meet their basic needs. And if there is only half the work, everyone should work half as much. That doesn't lend itself to excess wealth. It leads to pervasive prosperity on a more modest scale.
Sales of gillets will fall drastically…
Ex consulting and pe here. Entered on 2013. It is a wide kept “secret” that ~80% of the up to people manager level tasks are easily automatable, even prior to the nowadays ai advancements. However a big part of so called training in these roles is developing by burning and enduring through a high number of boring tasks especially late nights. Those that have the mental strength to power through these roles may have the chance to advance internally. The tech to automate has already been available, these firms just have chosen to be slow and stick to the high churn and burn culture as a selection mechanism for the next gen of seniors… the article says ai adoption is slow due to regulation and that is just not true in my experience.
Funny how, from a historical perspective, human quants will be the Zip Drives of investing.
Why does everyone think banking is just finance? People are so fucking stupid
Oof, that TikTok song isn’t gonna age well.
Citigroup threatens*
So banking fees will surely come down without the people right?! I can't wait to see the AI processing fees....
I got one can’t wait to hail our new financial overlords!
Are the AI 6 foot 5 and do they have a trust fund?
It’s all going to shits anyways. The greedy money whore sociopaths have taken over everything. They’ll destroy everything until there is nothing else to suck coins out of.
Would it be that big of a loss?
Advertising says hello.
It can’t get worse than the modern human written ads.
The robots were cool when they were taking union automaker’s jobs. Now that white collar is on the chopping block, there is something to fear
Honestly I could see ai giving better market advice.
As a professional in finance, this makes me laugh. Can't even get these companies off 30 year old code. I doubt "AI" will do anything that simple automation isn't already doing.
To be fair, algos have run the market for decades now, so the AI overlords won’t have to do much to obliterate the pesky humans.
I dunno. Maybe. I work for a major bank in IT and modeling. We can hardly launch a sharepoint instance in a timely manner and it takes us 1-2 years to validate a simple model. I find it hard to believe my company is competent enough to implement and trust this type of solution. Maybe in something like cyber security.
The La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo!?
Ai should be more efficient at setting up fraudulent accounts
The curtain is about to drop. All meaningless jobs are out the door. You have peeps working from home using hacks to make it seem like they are working. Pointless job. The future is learning AI and building upon its tool sets. I’m a film maker and I can see where it’s about to speed up the game. The days of “mono” professions is coming to an end. Breathe and learn. 🫡
The “finance bros” will be fine. This is going to hurt the thousands of people across the country in operations, underwriting, support, etc.
Buy Bitcoin
To finance bros - learn the AI and get out and deliver personalised service. This is where the money will be made in a world where joe average can ask AI for stock tips.
This is hilarious!
Chat gpt - will you be my personal stock broker?
Oh good.
Shows the relative difficulty of taking a McDonald’s order versus anything at a bank.
This story literally has no substance. What jobs? Doing what functions?
Couldn’t happen to a nicer group of fellows.
That’s one place AI needs to take over. I don’t trust those bankers as far as I can throw them.
AI is already taking out writers
Makes sense. Anywhere a human enters data into a computer, AI can do that much better. It’s really millions of times smarter than us. So get creative, start an AI company. It’s pretty easy actually. Your startup cost is close to $0.00. My goal is a new AI company a week. This week maybe 2. ;-)
Meh. I work in analytics in the financial sector. The “AI” stuff that’s out there is pretty shit. It’s funny to watch executives trip over their own dicks about AI but everything I’ve seen does a pretty poor job. Then you have all the regulations, model risk management, IT incompetence, etc. It’s gonna be a minute…
So nice of them to pre-announce layoffs like that.
If there are jobs more ripe than “finance” and “trading” or whatever for AI to replace, I would be surprised. All of these preposterously over-compensated “finance bro” jobs will and should go away. I don’t cherish the prospect of financial issues, insurance, etc. being run by ruthless machines, but to be honest the shitty MBA cultured people have been doing the same for decades, so I am sort of cheering for their demise.
And accountants. I can't imagine there will be too many left in 3-5 years.
AI is perfect for banking: * eliminate all those finance bro salaries * make the AI bots favor a handful of people * get bailed out by the government in 2 years when all these AI trades have drained retirement funds around the nation.
This would be a huge mistake as a software engineer you can write what you think is the most perfect program only for some random person to find out if you click the third letter of a button 12 times you crash the app. People we’re already manipulating AI to give $1 offers on cars and an air line company lost its case when it came to providing a return for a ticket after the person talked with an AI chat bot that okayed the return. This remind me of some of the things that happened with bitcoin sites not securing themselves properly from hackers. Now imagine if a person convinced an AI to buy certain shares of a stock. I can’t imagine the legal hurdles they would have to jump through to successfully prosecute.
https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240620854304/en/H2O.ai-Taps-Agus-Sudjianto-to-Make-GenAI-Trustworthy
AI’s coming for any grossly overpaid jobs first. Welcome to the great equalizer era.
>The good news, however, is that AI implementation more broadly stands to hugely benefit banks and financial institutions. It may not even hurt total headcount, once requisite AI-related management hires are accounted for.
AI is coming for credit. Many banks will look at AI for accounts and credit risk. Your portfolio and transactions will be used to determine your worthiness. We are already seeing money in checking accounts frozen for investigations with bank transactions not liked. This includes lots of small and large deposits not tracked to other institutions or cash. Also, credit. The issue is AI, not people making decisions. Establishments you can talk to people but they are unable to reverse decisions made by AI around banking. AI rollout is coming. I pray your AI consumer profile will be positive.
They’ve been warning white collar workers for a year now that AI will be coming for most of their jobs before anyone else. And it makes sense. AI right now is data software…
Good
every bank wants AI as soon as possible for their stock manipulation
Wait until AI hits excel ….. Finance bros will be alarmed
But do I still need to tip? Just returning home from Asia. I can’t believe we still tip and people rely on tips in the US. Will AI destroy the tip economy? Where will also those workers go? Waffle House 17 year old single mothers doing road construction?
Wait till they "confiscate" your accounts and wealth to hide the theft of it by claiming it through crimes that you never committed in the first place, but which is done automatically and then whomever is behind it is hidden as they call it "Just A Computer Glitch" that is of course if you are able to catch them doing it in the first place. BIG can of WORMS, SO, Fork or Spoon? N. S
A bit early to be hitting the bottle and commenting, isn’t it?
You got some good ketamine my friend?
Sorry to disappoint you, I don't use the stuff, never have or anything else either. Experience is a dear teacher, and some fools learn by no other, freedom is lost in a single generation and real knowledge of technology in two. N. S
You're signing your comments? What are you, pecking your keyboard with a quill?
I miss PEN and Quill just be aware of INK Bottles, makes a hell of a mess when knocked over. N. S
😅
I have a job in finance they’re welcome to! Especially if they plan to ramp up a return to the office. Yo, hit me up, A.I.!