It’s not out of jealousy.

Many people believe investment bankers are a net negative for society.

In the case of lawyers, a necessary evil. I have respect for people, not a profession.

To be fair, the term "lawyer" is generic in the US. It can mean many different things: (1) in-house corporate counsel, (2) external corporate counsel (advise on merge/acq/deals/contract), (3) civil lawyer (sue/divorce/personal injury/intellectual property, etc.), (4) defender (public or private), (5) public prosecutor (work for attorney general office), (6) law professor, (7) judge (Can you be a judge in US without a law degree? It seems hard to imagine in 2025.). And there must be other categories that I forgot. My point: Most people will have differing views on each category. Example: Most people would view public defenders, law professors, and judges as honorable, socially beneficial jobs.

Indeed. And this is an interesting counterpoint to the idea that higher income (always) confers status. Because the corporate jobs will typically be higher paid but lower status.

Regardless of how that bias is formed it's a relevant opinion. A not insignificant amount of the population holds a negative opinion of lawyers and views them as trashy or shady. So much so that in many neighborhoods real estate brokers will off a casual caveat if one of the neighbors is a lawyer.

You miss the point. why the low view exists is irrelevant.

Frankly, while I acknowledge their necessity, I have a poor (default) view of both bankers and lawyers. I don't see them as bad people, but people in their professions do many bad things.

If my son brings a banker home as a prospective mate, well, let's say they're not earning status points from their profession.

You (may have) and I (do) have respect for people in tough jobs like see workers. Doesn't mean my mom wouldn't prefer I date a nice doctor. My point being that social respect does not come with your personal respect.

> You miss the point. why the low view exists is irrelevant.

It's very much relevant to this conversation. Without specific negative factors like a "predatory" aspect, increasing earnings will increase prestige. ATC doesn't have those factors.

They brought up bankers and lawyers in response to someone asking "Which very highly paid job does not command respect in society? I can’t think of any"

So yes it is irrelevant in the specific context of that sub-conversation. Which isn't to say that your point arguing why that might not be applicable to ATCs isn't also a relevant thing to say to being the conversation back to the main topic of this thread.

It's not directly relevant to that preceeding comment, but it's relevant to the reason those were being brought up a couple commments higher.

Being relevant to either of those is enough to make it overall be: relevant.

One thing to consider about investment bankers: Many of them do pretty mundane work, like work on non-national/federal gov't and corporate bond issuance. (In most countries, national/federal gov't can directly issue bonds without investment bankers.) There is literally trillions of dollars of these bonds issued each year (usually to roll-over maturing debt) across all highly developed nations. It is fundamental to modern capitalism. I would estimate that 99.5% of these bond deals use "vanilla term sheets" (my term) -- literally copy and modify from the last deal. And, the buyers of these bonds are 99% institutional: our pension funds, mutual funds, and bond ETFs.

Also, secondary equity issuance is pretty non-controversial, and an important fund raising option for publicly-listed corporations.