Actuary article

[DW Simpson]

Don't know if anyone saw this last week --

http://www.sptimes.com/2002/02/12/Business/Actually__it_s_one_of.shtml

BenefitsLink.com highlighted it.

[Buru Buru]

Well it is incorrect on one fact. It says that there are only 4 exams to become an associate. That would be nice. I would be an associate.

[Troy McClure]

Shows how much faith to put in our press. How many actuaries do you suppose this writer talked to? I'm guessing none. I can't imagine that there is a single actuary that would tell you four, even on his/her worst day.

[urysohn]

It used to be four exams about 8 years ago. I bet they got that tidbit from somebody who finished up a while ago and doesn't have any students working for them (one of the consultants in the article rather than the academics).

I like the comment about "Experienced actuaries tell potential recruits that, yes, the work can be mundane. But it doesn't have to be." The examples of non-mundane work are non-traditional stuff. Well, I'm pretty traditional and I don't find my work mundane at all.

[Troy McClure]

On 2002-02-19 08:32, urysohn wrote:
It used to be four exams about 8 years ago. I bet they got that tidbit from somebody who finished up a while ago and doesn't have any students working for them (one of the consultants in the article rather than the academics).


You are talking pre-90s at least.

[Maine-iac]

They may just have been confused as well. The part about the 4 exam comes right after the part about needing high level math skills. Someone may have told the reporter that the first 4 exams are "the math exams" which they then confused with "the associateship exams". Either way, its really sloppy, since a simple check to the SOA and CAS websites will give exam and admission requirements.

[Anonymous]

On 2002-02-19 09:10, Troy McClure wrote:
You are talking pre-90s at least.


I think it was '94 that the switch was made.

[Buru Buru]

I guess if you look at the equivalent of the first 4 exams then it was about 1994. Although, it was never actually 4 exams.

[ch]

I got my ASA in the early 90's, and it was 11 exams for me. Not sure what it was under the prior system before they broke out all the math topics.

[Minerva]

Pre-breakout (mid-eighties) it was 5 exams to ASA and 4 or 5 (kept going back and forth) more for FSA. Goes back at least to early 70s.

[Troy McClure]

On 2002-02-19 10:02, Super Actuary wrote:
I guess if you look at the equivalent of the first 4 exams then it was about 1994. Although, it was never actually 4 exams.


Good point, I never thought of that. If he meant that it was 200 credits for ASA until 1995, and those 200 credits of material are now on the first 4 exams, and that's way to complicated to explain in a newspaper article, so I will just say 4 exams, then that may be reasonable. Although, I would expect a person that knowledgeable about the current first 4 exams to know that it actually is more, but...

[42]

4, 6, 47, what difference does it make. The important point is that the exams you kids write these days are so much easier than the ones we wrote "back in the old days" when FSA meant something. :razz: [/troll]

[Buru Buru]

Hey 42, Are you trying to incurr the wrath of all exam takers or what? These exams are not only harder than ever before, but they are even more useless on the job.

[42]

Come on - even my cat passed exams 1-3 on her first try without even studying! You kids have it so EASY nowadays. Why, I remember, back in the old days, when we used to have to make our own #2 pencils for the exams, and we didn't complain about the SoA-approved calculators because we didn't get to use calculators, and we used to have to walk to the exam in the snow (uphill - both ways) carrying my brother on my back ... and we liked it! <font size=-1>[/more trolling]

[DW Simpson]

The other day, I joined the Academic_relations@list.soa.org list-serve, which includes readings and opinions on the new QRA designation. So the 4 exam thing might be closer to reality than we know.

[zapped]

42 - you are crazy. none of the FSAs i know think their exams were anywhere near as difficult as the ones today. they were much more broad. the only thing they have in common is that they too were all day exams. when the SoA broke down the old exams into smaller ones, they began asking obscure little details that you would have to memorize the whole book for. when they went to the current system, they kept asking the same type of meaningless obscure questions.....either way, another thing yours & ours have in common: it's all drivel!!!!

[DW Simpson]

Quote: SoA-approved calculators

I especially enjoyed taking the early exams with the old solar powered calculators that handled like they came free with a box of Froot Loops. You know you're in trouble when the proctor always has a handful of extra calculators in case yours gets fried.

[Magilla]

Solar powered calculators! Luxury I say...Why when I took exams, we were only allowed to use an abacus and our answers had to be written on papyrus...

[42]

Hmm, maybe I should have made the "[/troll]" tag at the end of my posts a little bigger so people would know not to take it seriously. I would have thought the content would have tipped them off. :roll: And Zapped, I've got news for you, the SoA was "asking questions on obscure details that you would have to memorize the entire book for" when you were still in diapers - it's nothing we haven't all seen before!

[DW Simpson]

I noticed this today -- http://finance.monster.com/articles/actuaries

[Gates Is Antichrist]

Wow - any actuary reads that, and agrees, "yes...yes," and any nonactuary reading it would be freaked out just by the paragraph *before* "Getting Started" !

[Dr T Non-Fan]

"Insurance companies outsourcing actuarial work"?
That's interesting.
The rest is a bit outdated, in regards to the exams.

[Double High C]

Excerpts from link:

" ... knows when you get sick, how often you go to the doctor and how much you plunk down for your prescriptions. "


"Top actuaries earn more than $127,630."

Such (stereotypical) actuarial precision is so ... actuarial? Nah, I think that they earn at least 128,222.

Gee, I think I want a subscription to this informative newspaper.

As an aside, my guess is that the paper has a fundamentalist Republican slant (a la Sean Hannity, that brilliant man).

[Crystal Dragon.]

I for one would love to see "average salaries" for a profession listed with a mean and standard deviation.

"average" salary doesn't mean a thing! For one, is it the mean, median, or mode?

[Elisha]

You guys have to admit that the monster.com article is pretty decent compared to others - especially considering it was written by a financial "professional writer"

[42]

On 2002-03-13 11:58, Dr T Non-Fan wrote: "Insurance companies outsourcing actuarial work"? That's interesting. I'm guessing that they're referring mainly to product development, where a lot of work is already outsourced to consultants.