Nathan Kelly5 said:That's completely wrong. I don't do external accounting at all; I work in-house. In fact, I don't even strictly do accounting—I handle system-wide controlling, or sometimes I basically perform management duties because the executives can't even handle basic math, let alone make decisions.
External accounting firms make excellent money. Aside from salaries, overhead is almost nonexistent. At two external firms where I worked, the profit per employee was roughly $27. That means with 10 employees, you're looking at $267 in profit. And those weren't even premium clients; I'd say the billing was actually below average.
So, there's no such thing as poor earnings, regardless of what the media reports.
I am speaking about different reasons, which I have already explained sufficiently in this thread. I am speaking from the perspective of the evolution of the accounting profession.
The others are just speaking from self-interest. It’s tragic that hairstylists and waitresses are shaping the future of accounting. People like that shouldn't have a vote!
If you are primarily focused on management accounting within such a massive organization, why does any of this concern you?
External accounting firms can be incredibly lucrative. Once you account for salaries, there are virtually no other overhead costs. At the two external firms where I worked, the profit per employee was approximately $27. This means with just ten employees, you are looking at $267 in profit. And that isn't even considering high-end clients; if anything, I would say the billing was actually below average.
I am not an expert in the field, but it certainly sounds beneficial if one can provide those services with such a high profit margin.
I am speaking regarding different reasons, which I believe I have explained sufficiently within this thread. My perspective is centered on the evolution of the accounting profession itself.
What kind of "dark" evolution are you referring to? To be blunt, it is a craft that almost anyone can master if they possess the will. It is somewhat akin to the waitressing roles you mentioned; it isn't a job that necessitates specialized higher education or highly technical skills. As a general category, accounting has clear boundaries beyond which it simply transforms into something else entirely.
I am unsure what you mean by "development," but there are many sectors within finance that are broader and significantly more demanding than standard accounting. For instance, the work you do is on a much higher level. The same applies to fraud detection, forensic accounting, financial and management consulting, auditing, and tax advisory...
It seems to me as though you envision a typical bookkeeper evolving into an investment banker handling IPOs, mergers, acquisitions, restructuring, auditing, offshore accounts, and so on.
Nathan Kelly5 said:Cut the philosophy and the sentimentality. You sound like a politician. Our party consists of hardworking, honest, and dedicated individuals.
Be honest for once—how many accountants who take money from entrepreneurs have actually read even five or six basic laws relevant to their field? I’d wager that number is less than 1%. That isn't being hardworking or honest; it’s just pure incompetence.
Don't try to sell me that story; save it for your clients. When I started working in the service industry, veterans with 30 years of experience laughed at me when I said I studied one law or regulation every month, since nobody else bothers. Within a year, they were all coming to me for advice, telling me I was on a different level.
It isn't about being on a "different level"; it's simply standard practice anywhere in the world to spend the first few years of a career getting acquainted with the regulations of the country where you intend to work.
People are lazy, including accountants, and that is the crux of the matter. They know how to send an invoice, but they don't know the first thing about taking responsibility. Just collect the cash—that seems to be the motto across the entire North America.
And then there's the selling of these pathetic stories about experience, knowledge, honesty, and diligence. It’s nauseating. Anyone can see what the accounting profession looks like here.
Explain to me what is wrong with pursuing more education? Even if it is formal training? Are you just too lazy to learn? It benefits the employees themselves—they get free education from employers, probably some time off, and they actually understand their jobs. Even if knowing everything is considered "unnecessary" (though most don't even grasp the concept).
It is also in the interest of entrepreneurs to have educated accountants; they won't go broke over the cost of a few thousand dollars in lifetime training for their staff!
The market, the state, the banks, the investors, and the citizens all benefit from it.
The only ones who don't benefit are the licensed hairdressers and waitresses. So, congratulations on your victory; who can stand against you when you hold the majority?
I wouldn't claim to be on a "different level." Rather, it is standard practice all over the world for someone fresh out of university to spend their first few years mastering the specific regulations of the country where they intend to build their career.
There is a clear hierarchy in this profession. A bookkeeper certainly doesn't grasp regulations nearly as well as an accountant, and a CPA understands them far better than both. Every CPA tends to carve out their own niche, whether that involves auditing, tax advisory, asset protection, and so on. Naturally, one can further specialize by pursuing credentials like being a CFA, CMA (which would be your path, for instance), CIA, CFE, or similar certifications.
Of course, it makes sense to study the regulations if you are engaged in the work, even if it isn't your primary career but simply a broader area of interest. My own professional path never involved practical economic experience like accounting or legal tracking, yet I still managed to teach myself to a level exceeding 90% of standard bookkeepers or IRS employees.
However, one shouldn't expect this from everyone, nor is it economically sound, as we will see below.
People are just lazy, including accountants, and that is the crux of the matter. They know how to bill you, but they don't know how to carry a minimum amount of responsibility! Just grab the cash—that’s basically the motto across the North America.
I think I am losing you a bit here. From an economic standpoint, why would a bookkeeper invest more knowledge, effort, or responsibility into their work if they are receiving the exact same price?
Are we discussing honesty and character traits, or pure economics—specifically, the ratio of input versus output? There is no economic logic in what you are suggesting.
In my view, they would be fools to work significantly harder and more responsibly for the same fee. The system allows them to operate this way, but as I already explained, I won't repeat myself.
Explain to me what is so wrong with having more education? Even if it is prescribed? Are you just too lazy to learn? This is actually beneficial for the employees themselves; they get free training from employers, probably some time off, and they actually become better at their jobs. Even if knowing everything is irrelevant (though they clearly have no idea what that term means).
It isn't how the world normally works to make licensing mandatory; people choose to get licensed because they want to. It is a matter of the market.
Nathan Kelly5 said:"Quote:"
Aren't they? It’s just a collection of political appointees. Interested. There’s nothing quite like living off the sweat and expertise of others. You know you’ve hit the jackpot when the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce finally see eye to eye. It doesn't get any easier than that.
I think you realize that everyone here is simply looking out for their own interests. financial interestsAnd whose are they? Financial interests. It doesn't take much brilliance to see through this. At the very least, one should be honest with themselves and the public—both individually and as part of those bloated groups of unnecessary people—about exactly who is pulling the strings and where they're coming from. Interested. They’re talking big, but they're really just hiding behind the interests of the accounting profession. Lol.
Those pathetic little pamphlets you call studies—is it even worth trying to debunk them? It feels like watching a task force conduct a "study" on how harmful growing grass is to a meadow. Even if every single point in your nonsensical pamphlet were easily disproven, what would actually change? Do you honestly think the accounting profession will suddenly gain some newfound vision and start speaking out against its own? financial interests?
It’s worth continuing the conversation on altruism, kindness, diligence, and integrity.
Is it really so strange that they are representing their own financial interests? 😁
