No doubt, an easy hire on the Rolodex alone. But when you make that case, whether she is on the fundraising side or not, she is 90% there to raise funds. Umm ok you are an analyst though. …and it is not about Hillary, but you can’t divorce the two. What conflict’s of interest or ethical responsibility develops with regards to raising funds when her mom is president? or running for president? or a senator?
“if you had to choose between: a grad with ben graham potential in the making, and chelsea, don’t pretend that you would talk yourself into passing on her, especially right now.” Who is to say she doesn’t have Ben Graham potential? Or that we can tell who has Ben Graham potential? Or that other candidates interviewing at this firm actually did have Ben Graham potential and were passed over? Or that if they thought someone had Ben Graham potential, that this person couldn’t have been hired in addition to Chelsea? Everything I’ve seen suggests that it’s perfectly plausible that she can do a good job at a financial company. She seems much less likely to jump to conclusions than many people I’ve read on this forum, and that means that she’s less likely to take outrageous risks.
if you’re the daughter of someone like clinton, i think you can get a job anywhere you want. her intelligence is a bonus.
Hedge funds reach out to Jenna? Not trying to pick on Jenna, but I don’t think she’s in the same league as Chelsea in terms of intellectual power and insight. She’d be fun at a party though, I’m sure. 
Diagree with Frankie on this one. I don’t think that the boys from Haliburton would welcome anyone with Clinton as his/her last name.
highparkcfa Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Diagree with Frankie on this one. I don’t think > that the boys from Haliburton would welcome anyone > with Clinton as his/her last name. of course, there will be some firms that won’t hire her. but seriously, she won’t have any trouble finding a good job. i would bet my bottom dollar that most of the investment banks would snap her up no problem, and i mean no problem.
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Who is to say she doesn’t have Ben Graham > potential? Or that we can tell who has Ben Graham > potential? Or that other candidates interviewing > at this firm actually did have Ben Graham > potential and were passed over? Or that if they > thought someone had Ben Graham potential, that > this person couldn’t have been hired in addition > to Chelsea? Not me. All I was getting at is that you are wearing some serious rose colored glasses if you think that the intangibles do not convincingly tip the scales. If I am shopping for a car and I come across two comparable LS 460’s both priced at 60k, I imagine I would lean towards the one with the Mark Levinson® Navigation System over the one without.
funny how many people are outraged about this. i dont know how many times i’ve read on this forum that networking is everything. instead of taking exam after exam, you should be out there networking. now people are outraged because chelsea is working at a HF? is that really a surprise? and she isn’t qualified because of her mom’s job/political performance? how ridiculous does that sound? how many of you got your jobs via networking? do you feel bad about it? as franky would say… don’t hate the playa. hate the game. what a silly thread.
nolabird032 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > funny how many people are outraged about this. i > dont know how many times i’ve read on this forum > that networking is everything. instead of taking > exam after exam, you should be out there > networking. now people are outraged because > chelsea is working at a HF? is that really a > surprise? and she isn’t qualified because of her > mom’s job/political performance? how ridiculous > does that sound? how many of you got your jobs via > networking? do you feel bad about it? > > as franky would say… don’t hate the playa. hate > the game. > > what a silly thread. This is 100% correct. It is all about networking, until the person with the better network has a better job than the person who talks about how important networking is. Then its just unfair! I think the only real issue here is any potential conflict of interest if her mother ends up in the White House. You can’t stop a person from working because their mother runs the country, but considering that presidential assets usually go into a blind trust, there is, at the very least, the perception of a conflict of interest.
outraged is a bit strong. not surprised, thats for sure. concerned is probably a better adj. “Hedge fund money, which now exceeds $1 trillion, has emerged in the past several years as a potentially powerful force in U.S. politics, as underscored by the significant role it is playing in the presidential aspirations of Clinton and Giuliani. During the 2006 election cycle, executives at the 30 biggest hedge funds made $2.8 million in contributions to political candidates or party committees, almost double the amount in 2000. Yet it is not just the money they donate directly that makes people in hedge funds attractive to campaigns. They also offer access to other potential donors in the financial world, which in recent election cycles has become one of the biggest sources of political contributions.” or from the NYT “Are hedge fund guys going to be happy with their art collections and their houses in Greenwich or are they going to take the next step?” said Byron R. Wien, the investment strategist at Pequot Capital. “As Hollywood once invaded politics, you will see the same with hedge funds.” Money from Wall Street has long been a factor in Washington and has tended to flow, with a policy agenda, to the ascendant political party. Giving by people in hedge funds, on the other hand, tends to be more personal and ideological. Some of the most aggressive donors have been Democratic supporters like George Soros, David E. Shaw of D. E. Shaw and James H. Simons at Renaissance Technologies, as well as younger executives like Thomas F. Steyer at Farallon and Marc Lasry at Avenue Capital, all of whom gave generously during the 2006 election cycle… …But with the rapid growth of their money and stature, an increasing number of the hedge fund wealthy are not just putting their money to work, they are forging personal and professional ties with a generation of politicians who have come to spend as much time raising money as they do drafting legislation." Factor in the squeaky clean ethical track record of our favorite politicians and you can almost hear that faint ticking sound… that is a time bomb.
nolabird032 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > funny how many people are outraged about this. i > dont know how many times i’ve read on this forum > that networking is everything. instead of taking > exam after exam, you should be out there > networking. now people are outraged because > chelsea is working at a HF? is that really a > surprise? and she isn’t qualified because of her > mom’s job/political performance? how ridiculous > does that sound? how many of you got your jobs via > networking? do you feel bad about it? > > as franky would say… don’t hate the playa. hate > the game. > > what a silly thread. You are preaching in a forum where most think that taking the GMAT, CFA, FRM, CAIA is the ticket to the promise land.
You guys are missing the point. Things like this should be rated on one system and one system only, and that system is “hot or not”. I give Hilary a big fat NOT…case closed
So what does that have anything to do with Chelsea? Your basically explaining that Hedge Funds are now trying to lure political opinon their way by backing certain canditates. Is this supposingly a new concept? I beleive a company called “Enron”, donated alot of money to this fellow called GWB’s campaign back 8 years ago or so.
a rating system that rhymes. you’re on to something randall.
adehbone Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Your basically explaining that Hedge Funds are now > trying to lure political opinon their way by > backing certain canditates. Is this supposingly a > new concept? > > I beleive a company called “Enron”, donated alot > of money to this fellow called GWB’s campaign back > 8 years ago or so. Thanks. And you are saying that since this is similar to past actions, this is going to be just fine then. sweet. How, did that enron thing work out for the markets again? > So what does that have anything to do with > Chelsea? nothing. she networked and got an analyst position. I don’t sense any conflicts of interest or ethical issues that could arise. In fact, I imagine that when her mom is president she will resign and take a new position as a health care specialist serving underprivileged children.
I suspect there could be issues if her mom is President regarding insider information on policy process and likely outcomes of legislation (like whether mom would veto something, which is something moms often do). On the other hand, mom would also be in charge of the regulatory agencies, and the attorney general, but it still would look bad. They did survive the Whitewater thing though, which was an investment scandal, if I recall. (I basically like the Clintons, but I’m perfectly happy to admit that they have plenty of mud on their faces from years of political battle)
> Thanks. And you are saying that since this is > similar to past actions, this is going to be just > fine then. sweet. How, did that enron thing work > out for the markets again? So children of Political Figures/Judicial System, deserve to not get any jobs? What if Ivanka Trump who graduated “magna cum laude” from Wharton was given the job, would she deserve it? Should she be allowed to invest in any companies that deal with real estate? Once you get out of your “Perfect World” bubble and join the rest of us in the real world, that would be great. Till then every canditate is being backed by various Investment Bank CEOs/Hedge Funds/Private Equity firms and other forms of big business. It is all apart of the political game. So in any case there is some risk of “Conflict of Interest”, which is out of your control. If you beleive it truly exists if Hillary ends up in the White House, then just bet against the market outcomes, like all the smart people who made $$$ betting against Enron did.
Whitewater was an investment scandal. I can remember one or two others. Global Crossing: “McAuliffe turned a $100,000 initial investment in the company into $18 million in less than a year and a half—a nifty 18,000% profit. According to the New York Times, McAuliffe made millions more trading the stock and options after the company went public in 1998. …Shortly after Winnick’s generous contribution to Clinton’s legacy building library, Global Crossing was awarded a $400 million contract by the Pentagon.” Cattle Futures: "Hillary Rodham Clinton was allowed to order 10 cattle futures contracts, normally a $12,000 investment, in her first commodity trade in 1978 although she had only $1,000 in her account at the time, according to trade records the White House released yesterday. The computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader. The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits – as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account, Leo Melamed, a former chairman of the Merc who reviewed the records for the White House, said in an interview. He said the discrepancies in Clinton’s records also could have been caused by human error. " I don’t want to just pick on the Clintons. I can’t think of a politician that would meet the laxest ethical standards.
she is brought up in one of the elite families of the world. you cant’ seriously expect her to work at a discount brokerage no matter how inept she might really be. given that clinton has a 140 IQ, she problaby carries some intelligence herself.
Several of my friends were classmates of Chelsea and by all accounts, she was pretty on top of things as far as academic accomplishments were concerned