Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:05 am

Also, how about some data on current graduates?

Wow dude, lawyers as a whole are wealthier than the general population? Stop the presses! You mean that 50 year old lawyers who graduated in a radically different legal hiring market have established pretty solid careers for themselves? Amazing.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby Grizz » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:11 am

kapital98 wrote:I'm glad you remembered me. If you look at the thread you'll see Mickey's chart didn't change anything I posted. If you knew business cycle and labor economics you may not be constantly repeating "the sky has fallen" mantra. Please, look at my posts again. I see no reason to repeat myself.

I never said elitism was bad. That would be a value judgment. I'm saying elitism can significantly alter your view on debatable topics. Please look at the salary distribution graph. ~25% of lawyers make $50,000 or less. This is a middle class income. However, once you go beyond the lower 25% incomes quickly rise into the "upper middle class" and "upper class" category. Income distribution in the U.S. is heavily skewed. Once you start making an income of ~$170,000 you are by all definitions rich. The median lawyer is firmly upper middle class. (If you wish to make the 'debt' argument please go back to the former thread and read about discounting and existence value.)

There is an incredible amount of talk about unemployment among lawyers. Lawyers are not NEARLY as bad off as the general consensus believes. Here is proof: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat25.pdf

People in "Legal Occupations" have a 3.4% unemployment rate in 2009 and a 2.7% unemployment rate in 2010. This is corresponding to a ~10% unemployment rate for the general public. PLEASE, give me some ACTUAL STATISTICS, not anecdotal evidence, to support your claim! :roll:

Note: Unemployment is technically different than "I don't have a job." People may leave the labor force because they are too frustrated to look for work and they are no longer considered unemployed. This has obviously happened in the legal market and should be given consideration (it's happened in almost every industry and is why the U6 rate may be a better indicator of unemployment than the U3 rate.)

The key is to understand cyclical unemployment. The structure of the legal industry may have changed but it is doubtful that it radically changed. In professional markets there tends to be a very long lag period (OCI is 2 years before you're even employed!) and this makes cyclical unemployment even more severe.

User avatar
red_alertz
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:42 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby red_alertz » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:12 am

OP, if u get accepted into one of ur top choices, definitely go, if not marshall unless job lined up in missi

LoyalRebel
Posts: 193
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 1:20 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby LoyalRebel » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:14 am

Aberzombie1892 wrote:Mississippi college would be better in strict terms. However, it's not worth more than $50,000 or so of debt. Really.

On positive note, by the time you graduate from there, it would likely be considered to be the strongest law school instate for being "hired." More employers are now recruiting there than at Ole Miss, and although that doesn't necessarily mean much at the moment, it implies that more employers are (slowly) becoming more comfortable with the school.


False.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby beachbum » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:22 am

The persistence of red_alertz is absolutely fascinating. It's like watching a car crash that keeps repeating itself.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:41 am

kapital98 wrote:PLEASE, give me some ACTUAL STATISTICS, not anecdotal evidence, to support your claim! :roll:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704913304575371243914408322.html?mod=WSJ_hps_editorsPicks_3

According to this July WSJ article (which got its data from NALP, which is the most reliable source there is for legal hiring data), 71% of the class of 2009 had jobs that required a J.D. and bar passage. Of those, 25% said that their employment was temporary (see: temporary contract attorneys, which is often the kiss of death for becoming a full-time lawyer). And although the article doesn't say, I'd imagine a decent portion of that 71% were counted as employed because they hung their own shingle and started a solo practice (which is typically a route only taken by recent grads who can't find a job, and it is a pretty ill-advised move, both professionally and financially, to go solo right out of law school). Also, 2% of those reporting jobs were thanks to fellowships or grants provided by their law schools, and a decent chunk of those employed were also part-time. So a pretty solid estimate would be that ~50-60% of the class of 2009 found a full-time, real lawyering job?

And it is a real mistake to think "Well, 50% of the students at school X found legal employment." I know this is oh-so-elitist to say, but the reality is that tier 1 grades (and especially T14 grads) made up the lion's share of the total percentage of employed graduates. At some of the very worst law schools in the country, it wouldn't be unreasonable to estimate that <25% of grads found full-time, real legal employment.

edit: Here's the NALP report on that data: http://www.nalp.org/2009selectedfindingsrelease. I'd ignore the overall employment rate, because law schools have gotten really good at manipulating that data in the last 10-20 years. The crucial portion of the report is near the bottom, where they talk about those in J.D.-required, bar passage-required jobs, aka real legal jobs. (Even this is probably manipulated to some degree, but it is a better metric than the overall employment numbers). Again, 71% employed in these law-degree required jobs, with 23% of these being temporary, 2% being grant jobs from the school (like the SMU program), 3% being solos, and more than 10% of all total jobs being part-time.
Last edited by romothesavior on Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby Grizz » Sun Apr 24, 2011 2:43 am

romothesavior wrote:
kapital98 wrote:PLEASE, give me some ACTUAL STATISTICS, not anecdotal evidence, to support your claim! :roll:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704913304575371243914408322.html?mod=WSJ_hps_editorsPicks_3
According to this July WSJ article (which got its data from NALP, which is the most reliable source there is for legal hiring data), 71% of the class of 2009 had jobs that required a J.D. and bar passage. Of those, 25% said that their employment was temporary (see: temporary contract attorneys, which is often the kiss of death for becoming a full-time lawyer). And although the article doesn't say, I'd imagine a decent portion of that 71% were counted as employed because they hung their own shingle and started a solo practice (which is typically a route only taken by recent grads who can't find a job, and it is a pretty ill-advised move, both professionally and financially, to go solo right out of law school). Also, 2% of those reporting jobs were thanks to fellowships or grants provided by their law schools, and a decent chunk of those employed were also part-time. So a pretty solid estimate would be that ~50-60% of the class of 2009 found a full-time, real lawyering job?

And it is a real mistake to think "Well, 50% of the students at school X found legal employment." I know this is oh-so-elitist to say, but the reality is that tier 1 grades (and especially T14 grads) made up the lion's share of the total percentage of employed graduates. At some of the very worst law schools in the country, it wouldn't be unreasonable to estimate that <25% of grads found full-time, real legal employment.


Also 45,000 grads, less than 30,000. Math is a bitch.

ohiohawk58
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:44 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby ohiohawk58 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:58 pm

OT, do people think marshall is worth it for 30K in debt?

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:00 pm

ohiohawk58 wrote:OT, do people think marshall is worth it for 30K in debt?

Total debt? Like for all three years? Sure, that's a pretty low risk proposition, especially if you're from Ohio (sounds like you are). Just recognize that your job prospects coming out won't be great, and it may take a lot of work on your part to land a full-time legal job, but 30k total is pretty manageable.

ohiohawk58
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:44 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby ohiohawk58 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:02 pm

romothesavior wrote:
ohiohawk58 wrote:OT, do people think marshall is worth it for 30K in debt?

Total debt? Like for all three years? Sure, that's a pretty low risk proposition, especially if you're from Ohio (sounds like you are). Just recognize that your job prospects coming out won't be great, and it may take a lot of work on your part to land a full-time legal job, but 30k total is pretty manageable.


Yes for all three years, I received a partial scholarship and my sister is letting me live rent-free with her during school (15 min from campus).

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:06 pm

ohiohawk58 wrote:Yes for all three years, I received a partial scholarship and my sister is letting me live rent-free with her during school (15 min from campus).

Sounds like a pretty good deal then, you'll be in better shape financially than most T1 students after graduation. Make sure you really network and work your connections in the state. Good luck.

User avatar
Grizz
Posts: 10583
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2010 6:31 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby Grizz » Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:20 pm

romothesavior wrote:
ohiohawk58 wrote:Yes for all three years, I received a partial scholarship and my sister is letting me live rent-free with her during school (15 min from campus).

Sounds like a pretty good deal then, you'll be in better shape financially than most T1 students after graduation. Make sure you really network and work your connections in the state. Good luck.


I'd also add to drop out if you lose your scholarship.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 8:55 pm

Romo - Thank you for this thread and the link to the other thread.

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby kapital98 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:18 pm

romothesavior wrote:
kapital98 wrote:P.S. The general unemployment rate for professionals is ~1-2%. The average unemployment rate for the general public is ~5-6%. This is when the economy is not in a recession. Even during the worst economic downturn in 80 years lawyers are still better off than the general public is when things are going good!

What in the hell is that data based on? Are you really saying that 2-4% of lawyers are unemployed right now? How is "lawyer" being defined?

If you genuinely believe that, then I have some beautiful oceanfront property in Arizona you may be interested in.


Official U.S. unemployment is measured by the "Current Population Survey" (http://www.bls.gov/cps/). It is a monthly survey conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Almost every time you see a news outlet talking about unemployment the statistics are from the CPS. The CPS is also overwhelmingly the dominant form of employment data used in academic research.

The link I gave is microdata from the CPS. The data is very comprehensive. If you want to challenge the most reputable form of employment data in the world be my guest :lol:

romothesavior wrote:http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704913304575371243914408322.html?mod=WSJ_hps_editorsPicks_3

According to this July WSJ article (which got its data from NALP, which is the most reliable source there is for legal hiring data), 71% of the class of 2009 had jobs that required a J.D. and bar passage. Of those, 25% said that their employment was temporary (see: temporary contract attorneys, which is often the kiss of death for becoming a full-time lawyer). And although the article doesn't say, I'd imagine a decent portion of that 71% were counted as employed because they hung their own shingle and started a solo practice (which is typically a route only taken by recent grads who can't find a job, and it is a pretty ill-advised move, both professionally and financially, to go solo right out of law school). Also, 2% of those reporting jobs were thanks to fellowships or grants provided by their law schools, and a decent chunk of those employed were also part-time. So a pretty solid estimate would be that ~50-60% of the class of 2009 found a full-time, real lawyering job?

And it is a real mistake to think "Well, 50% of the students at school X found legal employment." I know this is oh-so-elitist to say, but the reality is that tier 1 grades (and especially T14 grads) made up the lion's share of the total percentage of employed graduates. At some of the very worst law schools in the country, it wouldn't be unreasonable to estimate that <25% of grads found full-time, real legal employment.

edit: Here's the NALP report on that data: http://www.nalp.org/2009selectedfindingsrelease. I'd ignore the overall employment rate, because law schools have gotten really good at manipulating that data in the last 10-20 years. The crucial portion of the report is near the bottom, where they talk about those in J.D.-required, bar passage-required jobs, aka real legal jobs. (Even this is probably manipulated to some degree, but it is a better metric than the overall employment numbers). Again, 71% employed in these law-degree required jobs, with 23% of these being temporary, 2% being grant jobs from the school (like the SMU program), 3% being solos, and more than 10% of all total jobs being part-time.


HONESTLY??? You're going to try to refute the CPS with a WLS journal article and a press release? You clearly do not understand what I'm saying (what was your UG major btw?).

Thank you for the NALP post. However, it doesn't change my argument. 71% employed is different than saying 29% are unemployed. If you look at the data from the CPS you will see that people are dropping out of the labor force or moving into different sectors (which is exactly what I said in my last post...) Essentially, people are underemployed, unemployed, or not seeking work. This is a cyclical phenomena with a lag effect!

I wouldn't trust any of the information schools release because its completely manipulated. The CPS is not manipulated (unless you really think the Dept. of Labor is faking the numbers.)

Over time the legal market will improve.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:22 pm

I'm vaguely sure that people coming out of law school without a job are not counted in unemployment numbers. Nor are those workin Mc'D's even though they have a JD.

--ImageRemoved--

Must. feed. trolls.

Edit: also, "moving into other sectors" is considered "bad" if you just paid for a law degree.

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:35 pm

kapital98 wrote:HONESTLY??? You're going to try to refute the CPS with a WLS journal article and a press release? You clearly do not understand what I'm saying (what was your UG major btw?).

Thank you for the NALP post. However, it doesn't change my argument. 71% employed is different than saying 29% are unemployed. If you look at the data from the CPS you will see that people are dropping out of the labor force or moving into different sectors (which is exactly what I said in my last post...) Essentially, people are underemployed, unemployed, or not seeking work. This is a cyclical phenomena with a lag effect!

I wouldn't trust any of the information schools release because its completely manipulated. The CPS is not manipulated (unless you really think the Dept. of Labor is faking the numbers.)

Over time the legal market will improve.

Your stupidity (and your arrogance) is stifling.

1. This isn't WSJ data. This isn't law school reported data (although if it was, it would be manipulated in favor of HIGHER employment). This is NALP data. The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR LAW PLACEMENT. If you want to argue that there is a better source of data for assessing the current legal market for recent graduates, then be my guest.

2. People are dropping out of the labor force and moving to different sectors in massive numbers, and this supports your argument... how? "Hey, go to law school! The legal market is great! Check out those thousands of recent grads waiting tables at Applebee's who were forced out of the legal hiring market because there are no jobs for them." You're probably right; I'm sure J.D. employment numbers for recent grads is pretty good once you exclude people who never got a job in the first place and had to leave the legal profession entirely.

3. The microdata from CPS you provided does not in any way show us how current graduates are faring. Over and over and over, you try to use established lawyers as an indicator of the health of the legal market for CURRENT GRADS. Established lawyers make more money than the average American? Cool story bro. And I'm not all that surprised that the overall legal unemployment number is low. Established lawyers have pretty damn good job security. It is the recent grads who have been getting screwed out of jobs. For Christ's sake, get on the same wavelength as everyone else. Let's talk about the current hiring market for current graduates, please. And for that, the NALP data I posted is about as good as it gets.

Also, stop with this cyclical bullshit. Yes, legal hiring is cyclical. We get it. All hiring is cyclical No one said otherwise. But 1) even when it is BOOMING (as it was just a few years ago), there are thousands of people who couldn't get legal jobs, mostly from lower ranked law schools and 2) almost every single person in the legal hiring community will tell you that things may never recover fully. I'm going to listen to the law school hiring experts, not you, sorry chief. The law school model, even before the downturn, was and continues to be simply unsustainable. There are not enough jobs to go around, and charging people 200k+ for a shot at a sub-50k salary is outrageous. The fact that legal hiring is cyclical is no reason to go into law school if the recovery won't likely benefit you anyways.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:40 pm

romothesavior wrote:sorry chief.


Quoted because I like this phrase. Also, kapital, c'mon bro.

User avatar
Stringer6
Posts: 5865
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 12:45 am

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby Stringer6 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 9:40 pm

You people are horrible

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby kapital98 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:10 pm

romothesavior wrote:
kapital98 wrote:HONESTLY??? You're going to try to refute the CPS with a WLS journal article and a press release? You clearly do not understand what I'm saying (what was your UG major btw?).

Thank you for the NALP post. However, it doesn't change my argument. 71% employed is different than saying 29% are unemployed. If you look at the data from the CPS you will see that people are dropping out of the labor force or moving into different sectors (which is exactly what I said in my last post...) Essentially, people are underemployed, unemployed, or not seeking work. This is a cyclical phenomena with a lag effect!

I wouldn't trust any of the information schools release because its completely manipulated. The CPS is not manipulated (unless you really think the Dept. of Labor is faking the numbers.)

Over time the legal market will improve.

Your stupidity (and your arrogance) is stifling.

1. This isn't WSJ data. This isn't law school reported data (although if it was, it would be manipulated in favor of HIGHER employment). This is NALP data. The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR LAW PLACEMENT. If you want to argue that there is a better source of data for assessing the current legal market for recent graduates, then be my guest.

2. People are dropping out of the labor force and moving to different sectors in massive numbers, and this supports your argument... how? "Hey, go to law school! The legal market is great! Check out those thousands of recent grads waiting tables at Applebee's who were forced out of the legal hiring market because there are no jobs for them." You're probably right; I'm sure J.D. employment numbers for recent grads is pretty good once you exclude people who never got a job in the first place and had to leave the legal profession entirely.

3. The microdata from CPS you provided does not in any way show us how current graduates are faring. Over and over and over, you try to use established lawyers as an indicator of the health of the legal market for CURRENT GRADS. Established lawyers make more money than the average American? Cool story bro. And I'm not all that surprised that the overall legal unemployment number is low. Established lawyers have pretty damn good job security. It is the recent grads who have been getting screwed out of jobs. For Christ's sake, get on the same wavelength as everyone else. Let's talk about the current hiring market for current graduates, please. And for that, the NALP data I posted is about as good as it gets.

Also, stop with this cyclical bullshit. Yes, legal hiring is cyclical. We get it. All hiring is cyclical No one said otherwise. But 1) even when it is BOOMING (as it was just a few years ago), there are thousands of people who couldn't get legal jobs, mostly from lower ranked law schools and 2) almost every single person in the legal hiring community will tell you that things may never recover fully. I'm going to listen to the law school hiring experts, not you, sorry chief. The law school model, even before the downturn, was and continues to be simply unsustainable. There are not enough jobs to go around, and charging people 200k+ for a shot at a sub-50k salary is outrageous. The fact that legal hiring is cyclical is no reason to go into law school if the recovery won't likely benefit you anyways.



1. I never said it was WLS data. The WLS is a news outlet.

2. You have no understanding of cyclical unemployment (For an idea please read: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cyc ... oyment.asp)

Legal hiring is not cyclical! When the economy is at potential (everything’s good) only frictional and structural unemployment exists. This was the state of the economy 5 years ago (the real estate bubble had no statistically significant impact on the legal market.) You have no idea what I’m talking about or what you’re trying to respond to.

3) Established lawyers during normal economic times have a nice lifestyle with low unemployment. How do you think these people got jobs in the first place. Why, before the recession, did we not here about all this TTT “THE SKY IS FALLING” nonsense? Please post links of pre-2007 stories and data to confirm this.

4) Whether the law school model has forever changed is debatable. This is a structural issue (NOT CYLICAL.) As I have explained several times this is due to the supply side of the market. Please go back to my prior posts or I can copy and paste them if you want. Overall, the changing structure of the legal world is massively blown out of proportion. Firm structure and pay may change but employment will not.

Romo, it is absolutely amazing how ignorant you are about something you talk about constantly!

P.S. PLEASE READ/UNDERSTAND WHAT “CYCLICAL UNEMPLOYMENT” and “LAG EFFECTS” ACTUALLY MEAN!!!

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby kapital98 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:15 pm

prezidentv8 wrote:
romothesavior wrote:sorry chief.


Quoted because I like this phrase. Also, kapital, c'mon bro.


I lol'd at the McDonalds photo. :D

User avatar
romothesavior
Posts: 14772
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 4:29 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby romothesavior » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:17 pm

Okay kapital, you're right. The 0L with an undergrad degree in economics is right. The law students, recent grads, current lawyers, and legal hiring gurus are wrong. I admit defeat.

I will go back to focusing on the things that I do know (legal textbooks) and leave the legal hiring debates to the 0Ls who know what they're talking about.

User avatar
prezidentv8
Posts: 2821
Joined: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:33 am

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:19 pm

kapital98 wrote:You have no idea what I’m talking about or what you’re trying to respond to.


And since you're the one who seems to know so much, why not explain what you're talking about for us plebes?

scammedhard
Posts: 642
Joined: Mon Apr 18, 2011 1:17 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby scammedhard » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:22 pm

prezidentv8 wrote:
kapital98 wrote:You have no idea what I’m talking about or what you’re trying to respond to.


And since you're the one who seems to know so much, why not explain what you're talking about for us plebes?

Yes. Kapital, please explain to us the labor market for newly minted JDs, as seen by you...

Turtledove
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 9:31 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby Turtledove » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:24 pm

Image

User avatar
kapital98
Posts: 1188
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: Cleveland Marshall School of Law VERSUS Mississippi College

Postby kapital98 » Sun Apr 24, 2011 10:26 pm

prezidentv8 wrote:
kapital98 wrote:You have no idea what I’m talking about or what you’re trying to respond to.


And since you're the one who seems to know so much, why not explain what you're talking about for us plebes?


Prezidentv8, you majored in economics. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. But, here's the thread where I explained all of the relevant issues in this thread but with much greater detail: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 9&t=144357. Since you majored in economics you should have no trouble understanding what I said (which was marginally technical at times.)

For the record: I apologize if I'm being harsh. I prefer discussion based in theory and empirical evidence.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: acr, packerboy31489 and 8 guests