Kind of surprised by feedback in this thread. Major econ, minor sociology here, but to be fair I did all the math courses to leave msc route open later. I work in advertising, and IME you are MUCH better positioned for the industry with an econ degree than a marketing/pr/communications degree.

Again, econometrics is very valuable in advertising, but in the broader sense econ also signals to the employer that you are comfortable handling/analysing data and using it to inform decisions.

This is incredibly important in search (i.e. paying for ads on google), buying (i.e. buying TV spots against particular audience), trading systems (i.e. bidding on online ads in an auction system), market research (quant analysis) etc. But then you also need someone who can explain these processes in a simple way to clients, and again IMO, the implicit assumption is that econ grads are better positioned to do this than math/comp grads.

Anyone go to school in oregon? If so, which school is best? UO or OSU? (BA)

depends on what you do with it but you should have options if you get good grades or go to a top30ish school, the econ programs are much more math-intensive at those schools and are generally a fast track to the corporate world. if that isn't the case you're probably better off specializing in some way.

Econ is an "imperfect science" and this also kind of applies to job opportunities. It's in between being a skill-based major and a social science so your opportunities will be based more on seeking out a particular field/establishing a network as opposed to being set on a more straightforward path. It's definitely still better than being a straight-up humanities major, in any case.

My 2c:

BA Econ is a signaling degree. If you get good grades at a decent school you send a signal that you're hard working and smart. That's about it.

I don't think there are any jobs out there that specifically require econ knowledge at the BA level unless you've taken a lot of econometrics. But I doubt there are programs outside of the top 10 that go into the depth required to make that a useful asset.

If you want a "typical" econ job (eg working for the fed) you need at least a MA, better a PhD (and specialize in the right field).

Of course that doesn't mean that BA econ is useless. Ppl interested in finance for instance certainly will find their econ knowledge helpful at one point or the other.

econ degrees are fine as long as you take math classes on the side to supplement

take as much math and stats as you can in the next year

This. And I think this is good enough to give you a decent shot within the vast majority of fields that entry grad levels usually flock to.

Seems to me people may be overestimating the number of degrees where you learn a specialised skill that is useful to the employer straight off the bat. I think it is pretty tiny - but maybe I am wide of the mark as basing everything off anecdotal evidence.

My college had me take one Econometrics class as an undergrad (ECON 415, Intro to Econometrics). It was harder than any other ECON class that I had to take, but it was not the hardest class of my undergrad, not even close, ill leave that to MATH 470, Probability and Stats II.
Anyway, back on topic:
If you are to go into Econometrics in any significant way, I would recommend post-graduate studies. Personally get a Masters in Applied Economics (may be college dependent?) if I was interested in Econometrics.

Hopefully, Investment banking (more like markets).

I will sure as hell never use a AD/AS or Mundell Flemming model to derive at a decision, but being able to apply it is a good and valuable critical thinking skill.

To make a Econ degree more valuable, you should focus on math classes. Econ is considered poor man's math, so bringing it as close to math as possible, is probably optimal.

Some colleges offer an Actuarial Science and Economics (ASEC) degree through their Arts and Sciences Department. I know of 3, I think, in Michigan alone that offer it. As Spurious says, apply more math. This does just that.

Mate, sorry for being so direct but this statement is complete rubbish. Those who consider econ as "poor man's math" as you label it clearly haven't understood what econ is about. Math is used as a means to express highly complex issues in a concise and tractable manner. Using Krugman's words, math is supposed to be a servant, not a master.

I recommend taking as many math classes as possible only to those who consider pursuing a PhD. The reason, however, is not because deep math knowledge is a necessity to thrive in this field, it is once again merely about sending a signal to adcoms.

I dont remember who said it exactly, but I am pretty sure, they understood exactly what they were talking about. One of the argument was, that nowadays more than 50% of the articles published in Economics journals are page long proofs.
Semantics dont really matter though. Economics is heavy on math, some parts are more than others, so it depends on your curriculum.

What would you recommend people to take?

Choosing a math-heavy curriculum is the only way to get worthwhile jobs - with a few exceptions, but very few.

Where are you in CA? My undergrad isn't comp sci and I got into the Computer Science masters program at Long Beach, Dominguez hills and L.A. state. I just started a summer internship at a fortune 500 with a great group of people, my own office and I get paid a lot of money.

Long Beach MSCS

Yeh by poor mans math I assume that is more a reference to the fact that economists tend to be less rigorous than their mathematical counterparts. We play pretty hard and fast with some of their rules and conventions.

If you take lots of math econ courses, how is that relayed to potential employers? You can take all the math modules you want, but it will still be a BA (as opposed to a Bsc) so how would the employer know your programme was skewed toward math? Not sure how it works in US, but in UK I don't think it would be too common to lay out all the modules you took. In which case, can't this issue be glossed over pretty well with a bit of confidence and some blagging (assuming you are actually alright at math).

This is way too strong IMO.

FFS the Math vs Econ debate is not nearly this black and white.

If you're undergrad econ degree is a bridge to an entry-level job in Finance which will turn into you getting an MBA at some good program 4 years from now and going into the world of management, then no, you don't need a bunch of math. (*notice I said NEED-- a lot of Math will NEVER EVER EVER hurt you).

If you're undergrad econ degree is a bridge to a graduate program in any quantitative subject where your employability will be exactly dependent on how good your technical skills are, then yes, you do need a bunch of math.

So figure out which one you are and go from there. That said, it is MUCH easier to go from the latter to the former than vice versa.

How hard is it to turn a BA in Econ into an entry level finance job? That's currently kind of my plan, I'm getting a political science minor and was thinking of maybe looking into government work as well but thats still up in the air.