Skip Navigation
Megan McArdle

Megan McArdle - Megan McArdle is a senior editor for The Atlantic who writes about business and economics. She has worked at three start-ups, a consulting firm, an investment bank, a disaster recovery firm at Ground Zero, and The Economist. She is currently on leave.
More

Megan was born and raised on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, and yes, she does enjoy her lattes, as well as the occasional extra-dry skim-milk cappuccino. Her checkered work history includes three start-ups, four years as a technology project manager for a boutique consulting firm, a summer as an associate at an investment bank, and a year spent as sort of an executive copy girl for one of the disaster-recovery firms at Ground Zero � all before the age of 30.

While working at Ground Zero, Megan started Live From the WTC, a blog focused on economics, business, and cooking. She may or may not have been the first major economics blogger, depending on whether we are allowed to throw outlying variables such as Brad Delong out of the set. From there it was but a few steps down the slippery slope to freelance journalism. She has worked in various capacities for The Economist, where she wrote about economics and oversaw the founding of Free Exchange, the magazine's economics blog. She has also maintained her own blog, Asymmetrical Information, which moved to The Atlantic, along with its owner, in August 2007.

Megan holds a bachelor's degree in English literature from the University of Pennsylvania and an M.B.A. from the University of Chicago. After a lifetime as a New Yorker, she now resides in northwest Washington, D.C., where she is still trying to figure out what one does with an apartment larger than 400 square feet.

Should we feel sorrier for bankers or autoworkers?

By Megan McArdle
Mar 30 2009, 10:08 AM ET Comment

I've been pondering this question for a while, and this post from Felix Salmon brought it back:

The point is that there's so much uncertainty built in to the bonus system that the expected bonus has to be enormous in order to make up for it. Suppose I give you a choice between a base salary of $75,000 a year and an expected bonus of $1 million, or a base salary of $350,000 a year. If you're anything like me, you'd take the smaller amount with the higher predictability.

Now in the case of guaranteed bonuses, the calculus does change somewhat -- in that case, you might well opt for the $1 million. But the guarantee doesn't mean that you're certain to get that seven-figure payday; it just means that the degree of uncertainty has fallen substantially. And as Mike points out, you're still very much running the risk that your entire company goes bust, or that its new owners decide to abrogate those guarantees.

Not getting your bonus is a bit like those bad beats in poker. There's no point railing against them, they're bound to happen some of the time, and indeed if they never happened then the game wouldn't be structured that way in the first place. So accept it and move on with equanimity.

I know the answer on the left:  of course you should feel sorrier for the autoworkers, because they don't make as much money.  But though experiences aren't really transitive, I don't think you can say it's worse to have your job and industry destroyed as an autoworker than as a banker.  Having the whole life you planned on snatched from you is a miserable, miserable experience.  Neither group is going to starve; neither groups will, as a group, have nearly as affluent a life as they planned on.

The reason I ask the question is that the fundamental difference between bankers losing their jobs, bonuses, and so forth is that the bankers had it happen suddenly.  It's all very well to say they should have known, but they didn't, and suddenly having to sell your house, yank the kids out of their schools, etc. is not some just punishment for the terrible crime of working for an insolvent firm.

The autoworkers had some warning.  They had plenty of time to see the writing on the wall and get new jobs. So maybe I should feel less sorry for them.  But the very slowness of the change may, paradoxically, have made it harder to adjust.  All the bankers currently getting fired have gotten a very strong signal to get the hell out of an industry that needs to radically downsize.  The very slowness of the process of downsizing the auto industry has made it harder for autoworkers to disconnect; there's no firm moment when they should have said, "Yup, that's it." So maybe I should feel sorrier for them.


Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV? Have You Ever Tried to Sell a Used TV?
'Tis the Season to be Hateful (in Sports) It's Okay to Hate Sports Stars
50 Cent Endorses Marriage Equality; Wonders Why There's No 'White History Month' 50 Cent's Mixed Gay Marriage Endorsement
The '7 Dirty Words' Turn 40, but They're Still Dirty The '7 Dirty Words' Turn 40
Silicon Valley's Next Big Thing: Beer Silicon Valley's Next Big Thing: Beer

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Where in the World? Part 3: A Google Earth Puzzle

May 25, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

Megan McArdle
from the Magazine

Why You Can’t Get a Taxi

And how an upstart company may change that

Europe’s Real Crisis

The Continent’s problems are as much demographic as financial. They won’t go away soon.

Why Companies Fail

GM’s stock price has sunk by a third since its IPO. Why is corporate turnaround so difficult…