Why investment banking pays more than engineering
Find out why bankers out-earn engineers: proximity to the money printer, managing uncertainty, and the irony that engineers often end up improving the banks themselves.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Why investment banking pays more than engineering
Engineers build bridges, design chips and send rockets to Mars, yet bankers earn more. The explanation lies not in technical complexity, but in proximity to the machine that prints money. While engineering solves physical problems with precision, investment banking operates in the realm of uncertainty and risk management, where the margins allow multimillion-dollar payouts. And yet the debate reveals that many of those bankers are, precisely, engineers by training.
The money printer argument
A recurring argument holds that the financial sector earns more because it sits closer to money creation. The payments chain has fewer middlemen and the flow of capital is just a few steps away from the central bank. This view, summed up in the phrase "closer to the printer", suggests that banking captures value directly from monetary issuance, while engineering depends on real added value, which takes longer to materialize and spread around. Others qualify that it is not just proximity, but also lobbying power and the ability to generate regulatory rents.
Precision versus uncertainty
One of the sharpest arguments is that the engineer deals with exact quantities — material strength, structural calculations — that any calculator can solve, while the banker makes decisions under radical uncertainty. Seen this way, the skill of betting on incomplete information would be scarcer and therefore better paid. The rebuttal comes quickly: engineering also grapples with uncertainty, from material fatigue to the reliability of complex systems. The real difference may be that the banker can leverage their decisions with other people's capital, multiplying the impact of a win.
The irony of engineers working in banking
The paradox is complete when it is pointed out that the best investment analysts and consultants are often engineers by degree. The numerical profile, the discipline of modelling and the capacity for abstraction that engineering provides are exactly what investment banking demands. So the gap is not between professions but between sectors: those who apply their skills in finance earn more than those who apply them in infrastructure or physical technology. The question then shifts: why is engineering applied to the real world valued less than engineering applied to finance?
What the debate does not settle is whether that pay gap is efficient — a reflection of marginal productivity — or the fruit of proximity to the power of issuance. The reader who views the official story with skepticism knows the answer is not simple and that, perhaps, the Casio calculator and the money printer are not so far apart.
Related debates in the forum
Engineers build bridges, design chips and send rockets to Mars, yet bankers earn more. The explanation lies not in technical complexity, but in proximity to the machine that prints money. While engineering solves physical problems with precision, investment banking operates in the realm of uncertainty and risk management, where the margins allow multimillion-dollar payouts. And yet the debate reveals that many of those bankers are, precisely, engineers by training.
The money printer argument
A recurring argument holds that the financial sector earns more because it sits closer to money creation. The payments chain has fewer middlemen and the flow of capital is just a few steps away from the central bank. This view, summed up in the phrase "closer to the printer", suggests that banking captures value directly from monetary issuance, while engineering depends on real added value, which takes longer to materialize and spread around. Others qualify that it is not just proximity, but also lobbying power and the ability to generate regulatory rents.
Precision versus uncertainty
One of the sharpest arguments is that the engineer deals with exact quantities — material strength, structural calculations — that any calculator can solve, while the banker makes decisions under radical uncertainty. Seen this way, the skill of betting on incomplete information would be scarcer and therefore better paid. The rebuttal comes quickly: engineering also grapples with uncertainty, from material fatigue to the reliability of complex systems. The real difference may be that the banker can leverage their decisions with other people's capital, multiplying the impact of a win.
The irony of engineers working in banking
The paradox is complete when it is pointed out that the best investment analysts and consultants are often engineers by degree. The numerical profile, the discipline of modelling and the capacity for abstraction that engineering provides are exactly what investment banking demands. So the gap is not between professions but between sectors: those who apply their skills in finance earn more than those who apply them in infrastructure or physical technology. The question then shifts: why is engineering applied to the real world valued less than engineering applied to finance?
What the debate does not settle is whether that pay gap is efficient — a reflection of marginal productivity — or the fruit of proximity to the power of issuance. The reader who views the official story with skepticism knows the answer is not simple and that, perhaps, the Casio calculator and the money printer are not so far apart.
Related debates in the forum
- jjoojojojojojo Ferreras also abandons ship!!!!!: · 40 replies
- 121 men and women without honor. · 18 replies
- Why didn't Zapatero take the jewels and other stuff out of the safe if he knew they were going to search it? Same for the PSOE at Ferraz · 64 replies
- All your rowing savings are worth less than a zETAp necklace · 29 replies
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (21 replies).
More summaries
-
The myth of the millionaire engineer in 1992: how much is true
A fake 1992 engineer's salary has gone viral. The real data: salaries were high, but not that high. A comparison with today.
-
Spanish Wages: Structural Poverty or Social Mirage
Analysis of how inflation and wage stagnation push Spain toward income levels of less developed economies.
-
Spanish Engineering Salaries Stagnate, Driving Talent to Teaching
A forum user reports a €30k offer for a senior civil engineer, sparking debate on whether engineering degrees remain worth the investment in Spain.
-
Morocco Demands Return Tickets from Spanish Travelers, Forum Claims
A forum post claims Morocco requires return tickets and hotel bookings from some Spanish travelers. The measure remains unconfirmed by official sources.
-
Only the far right sees value in heterosexual relationships, Spanish sociologist claims
Andrea García-Santesmases argues that feminism has sidelined heterosexual desire, leaving only the far right to view it positively. The key points of the controversy and its implications.
-
Spain: a golden age or a tin-plate one?
Debt at 120% of GDP, job insecurity and statistical spin: the figures that dismantle the narrative of Spain's new Golden Age.