Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions

Actuarial Jobs by State

New York  New Jersey  Connecticut  Massachusetts 
California  Florida  Texas  Illinois  Colorado


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #361  
Old 06-25-2018, 03:20 PM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 115
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PeppermintPatty View Post
By the way, I am assuming the discount was based on nation of residence, not on actual nationality. That is, I assume a resident of the UK of Indian origin was paying the usual UK price. If that's not true, then I, too, prefer the new rule.
So you prefer assumptions made about people's incomes based on where they live rather than individuals have to show evidence of their earnings to qualify for a discount. I find this kind of thinking at odds with what actuaries do generally, even those at CAS. The direction of travel tends to be less use of crude methods.
  #362  
Old 06-25-2018, 03:27 PM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 6,697
Default

It's also worth pointing out, for our overseas friends, that sitting UK actuarial exams without a job is incredibly rare. I don't know what the US rules are, but to get your UK fellowship you need a minimum of 3 years relevant work experience, the UK exams aren't cheap, neither is membership of the profession. So it's more a case of UK employers subsidising overseas employers, rather than individual actuaries.

Doesn't change the position v the EU rules, but the moral argument for the old stance being discriminatory is, in the real world, pretty weak.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #363  
Old 06-25-2018, 03:31 PM
Moderator37's Avatar
Moderator37 Moderator37 is online now
moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,591
Default

Hey folks! This thread is fascinating, and I've read most of it in the last hour or so. There have been many reports from this thread that we mods are wading through. It's just become too much. I think it could use a cooling off period, so I'm locking the thread for now.
__________________
Don't meddle with dragons if you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
Closed Thread

Tags
acted, britain, ehrc, ifoa, racism, victimisation

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.13384 seconds with 9 queries