The Education Debate

We are the Makers of our own demise.

This debate will sound odd, and although I know the final answer is school it is possible to argue the time value of money. The logical place to start would be high school I guess.

Attended A.Y Jackson S.S here in Ottawa, Canada. Wasn't my best period, but I made it through. Main flaw happened here. Like most young teens, I hated mathematics at the time, and figuring that I would never use Calculus or other such maths, I never took them. This, unknown to me at the time with the "you don't need school" attitude, would bite me in the ass later.

Onto College.

While at Algonquin College, I was a marketing major. Kind of funny when I was so interested in Financial markets, but I decided to keep into it. Not the best marks yet again, same "why am I here" attitude. Growing tired fast of constant B.S'ing my way through projects (not to say I was slacking off, moreso what the premise of marketing is) and wanting to further myself in the trading world. I decided to focus on a trading career and left the school.

This is where the problems of my education collide; Not taking calculus and dropping out of College created a bad position for myself. One of the times you can tell your parents that they can say I told you so about school. I have, instead of making my path easier, placed boulders in the way. Now, to prove myself worthy of a Macroeconomics undergrad, I need get exceptional grades in the prep courses, applying as a mature student. No problem with this, just makes the progress through the program all the more difficult, creating a longer tangent before I begin my institutional career path. Not to mention the cash for 4 years of school, books, rent, expenses.

Now there are two things going against me. Past performance in school, and the great expense to partake on post secondary education. This lead me to looking to alternative routes for my education. I began to look into proprietary trading firms that accepted mentors. Now the cost of a mentorship is also quite high, as you pay the operating costs during your time with the mentor, and usually you also pay the mentor. I looked into TCA Markets, where you are paying $15 000 in data fees over the course of 6 months. They give you an account to trade, and you split 50/50 on the profits. That looked cool. But 15k is a lot for something that might not score you a job.

The time value of money.

So now I can debate the cost of going to school over 4 years vs. the cost of a 6 month mentorship. The school will get you fundamentally thinking as well as more rounded for a position with a firm. This however will not help you apply the fundamentals you are learning to the markets. You need to be able to draw that line yourself, as everyone sees the market through a different set of eyes. The mentorship will get you a track record which is practical for trading, which helps apply inter-market fundamental movement to the markets, but not necessarily helpful when getting a job at a trading floor.

Why not do both?

The most obvious reason has to be costs. Age is a factor going against the youth of the world. They are becoming debt ridden students, forced to go to school to get a job to pay their interest rates on their absurdly large student loans. I've been there, and I refuse to go back. It is difficult when your hard earned money goes straight to paying off school, so you cannot afford the luxury to begin building a bank roll. This is why I have been sluggish about applying for the program. Still paying off part of my Algonquin College experience, I do not want to go back into debt such as this. Having looked into other ways of paying for school, the only option has come down to getting student line of credit to pay for it.