(original article here, dealbreaker commentary here)

as a wharton undergrad, i’m convinced the nyt managed to find the 3 stupidest and more boring people here, or at least to edit their comments down to cliched soundbite-worthy drivel. i’m sorry, but you were only planning on going into finance because your parents were pushing you into it? seems like (a) an awful reason to work 80+ hours a week for 2 years, and (b) somebody needs to grow up, ween themselves from the teet, and stop letting mommy and daddy choose what you’re going to do with your life. seriously, who are these people?

I agree with dealbreaker commenter #32, who said:

As a Wharton student, I feel the down economy had many positive benefits in that my peers and myself have been forced to rethink our values, consider alternative (possibly more fulfilling paths), but still ultimately land good finance jobs if we REALLY want them.

Sure the economy’s made things rougher, but it’s mostly just made people think a little bit harder about whether or not a job in finance is what they want, and to consider the myriad (often more interesting or fulfilling) options they have coming out of undergrad with a top tier business degree that is useful in almost any industry (or at least as useful as the average liberal arts degree). in fact, the recession has done good things for wharton by reigniting the entrepreneurial spirit we’re known for by pushing students to make blaze their own paths and consider where their real competencies lie.

in short, the nytimes article is cliched, myopic, and misleading (like most of their articles). those students are probably antisocial nose-to-the-grindstone keep-your-head-down “follower” types unwilling to make their own opportunity who would have ended up going into i-banking just because everyone else does, rather than taking the time to consider the wide range of options open to them.