Full tuition at UNH (rank 93)? Forum

[RZ5646]

well i guess that just goes to show you that grades don't always correlate with intelligence

The 158 after 6 months of studying also makes me question Penn's admissions process.

[TheSpanishMain]

follow your dreams op!

not really, but sorta

Hi, I know you're only trying to bother with your sarcasm, but I'd still like to know what you mean by it.
I clicked on your profile and it looks like you're LUC '17? If that is Loyola University Chicago, why do you think attending that law school would help you achieve your dreams while UNH wouldn't help get me closer to mine?

The difference is she probably wants to work in Chicago and that was her best option at the table. If you can retake, you should. If you want to work in NH with modest goals, are out of retakes, and badly want to be a lawyer, I don't see why you shouldn't go. It's just your original post gives us a lot of question marks about those elements...one of such is you don't see yourself working in NH.

IIRC Leigh is also IP eligible and has some decent work experience, both of which should give her an edge in trying to find a decent job. Chicago's legal market is also way, way bigger than New Hampshire's.

[Wipfelder]

Dumb question:

Why hasn't anyone recommended the Army? Military is an awesome soft, you'll get law school paid for, it's a huge plus when applying for FSO or any other G-Man job, and it is pretty easy. Also, it pays well....and you'll have quantifiable experience working with leaders from nations that are "strategic priorities".

A captain in the army living in Europe has about the same quality of life as a European that makes in the 150k-200k range and you'll be constantly "deployed" to training events around the world.....it's the same in Korea or Alaska or Okinawa or Texas.

And also, the OP would have a Top Secret clearance, a major hurdle for State Department gigs.

Am I missing something? If OP hasn't thought of this, maybe he is stupid......

[TheSpanishMain]

Please don't inflict OP on some poor, unsuspecting platoon of soldiers.

[Ron Don Volante]

Dumb question:

Why hasn't anyone recommended the Army? Military is an awesome soft, you'll get law school paid for, it's a huge plus when applying for FSO or any other G-Man job, and it is pretty easy. Also, it pays well....and you'll have quantifiable experience working with leaders from nations that are "strategic priorities".

A captain in the army living in Europe has about the same quality of life as a European that makes in the 150k-200k range and you'll be constantly "deployed" to training events around the world.....it's the same in Korea or Alaska or Okinawa or Texas.

And also, the OP would have a Top Secret clearance, a major hurdle for State Department gigs.

Am I missing something? If OP hasn't thought of this, maybe he is stupid......

also:

Please don't inflict OP on some poor, unsuspecting platoon of soldiers.

[schmelling]

Post removed.

[jbagelboy]

You'd be setting a giant dumpster fire to your 3.87 from UPenn and entire career by attending UNH, or any law school. I mean, I guess people do it - I met a Stanford B.S. attending southwestern law once - but I'll never understand.

[Wipfelder]

Now, I would say almost no one enlisting will see combat in the next couple of years.

Especially from Europe. Most jobs don't involve combat, and even "combat" is a sliding scale of suck. A cool thing about war is its relatively non-judgemental in the long run, even if you suck at it, you still volunteered. There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

[jbagelboy]

Now, I would say almost no one enlisting will see combat in the next couple of years.

Especially from Europe. Most jobs don't involve combat, and even "combat" is a sliding scale of suck. A cool thing about war is its relatively non-judgemental in the long run, even if you suck at it, you still volunteered. There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

This sounds really inappropriately rude to me. But I wouldn't know.

[Wipfelder]

Now, I would say almost no one enlisting will see combat in the next couple of years.

Especially from Europe. Most jobs don't involve combat, and even "combat" is a sliding scale of suck. A cool thing about war is its relatively non-judgemental in the long run, even if you suck at it, you still volunteered. There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

This sounds really inappropriately rude to me. But I wouldn't know.

How so?

[star fox]

if you want to live in penn just go to penn st or something and get a job in the penn st gov. your dream job is surely ruled out - but almost everyones dream job gets ruled out. but given your options now of working a temp job or going to law school - id go to law school. youre pretty fucked right now and law school may not undo it but it gives you a second bite at the apple so to speak. but just go what city you want to work in.

the dude is not pretty fucked right now. with a gpa like that at a school like penn, he has a lot of doors open to him that he'd slam shut by going to a shit law school. my impression is he's too pretentious to take an entry-level job (even though he can't crack a 160 on the lsat) and too much of a dickhole to nail the interview for anything good.

I am not too pretentious to take an entry-level job, but I cannot go into a field like accounting, which is where I've been offered to head into. Pay is not as important to me as experience. I wouldn't be considering UNH if money was my primary concern. If on paper I am as attractive as you think I am as a candidate (which I don't agree, but thanks) am I not entitled to hold out for a job that at least has something to do with my interests and undergraduate degree? Something in that ball park at the least...

Here's your problem right here. You think you deserve a job that "interests" you. Guess what? 99 % of people don't work a job that "interests" them. You need to realize you're not all that special and accept one of those regular-people jobs that you are able to get but you don't want to accept because you think you're entitled to some unicorn type job. It's time to man up, that's not how the world works.

[jbagelboy]

Now, I would say almost no one enlisting will see combat in the next couple of years.

Especially from Europe. Most jobs don't involve combat, and even "combat" is a sliding scale of suck. A cool thing about war is its relatively non-judgemental in the long run, even if you suck at it, you still volunteered. There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

This sounds really inappropriately rude to me. But I wouldn't know.

How so?

I'm not trying to give you a hard time or be a dick, just surprised by the language.

To say that military servicemen fall along "a sliding scale of suck" and accuse a large number of trained marines or army of uselessness & cowardice in the field doesn't strike me as particularly respectful or accurate. These people go under rigorous training prior to deployment and while a lot of them have severe mental health issues in the wake of seeing combat, when they are in the operation coming under fire or making a field scan the conduct is at a pretty high quality. That, plus the tech, was presumably why we have such (relatively) low fatalities considering the number of conflicts engaged in at once.

If you served you would actually know unlike me so maybe you're right. It's just not the message friends and acquaintances with Afghanistan tours convey.

[MidwestLifer]

(I think he meant combat itself was a sliding scale of suck, not those involved, and thus his second point was that it could be a lot worse since you don't have to be Rambo incarnate)

[schmelling]

Post removed.

[TheSpanishMain]

Deployments themselves are a sliding scale of suck.

Maintaining communication satellites or analyzing intelligence files on a huge base like Kandahar is very different than manning a small outpost on the Pakistani border.

[jbagelboy]

Sorry if I misunderstood

[Rigo]

Sorry if I misunderstood

Eh, I don't think your instincts were off.

There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

This statement isn't ambiguous.

[Wipfelder]

Now, I would say almost no one enlisting will see combat in the next couple of years.

Especially from Europe. Most jobs don't involve combat, and even "combat" is a sliding scale of suck. A cool thing about war is its relatively non-judgemental in the long run, even if you suck at it, you still volunteered. There are quite a few dudes I know whose major contribution under fire was to lie in the fetal position under a Humvee and cry. They are still 100% eligible GI Bill/Yellow Ribbon recipients....

This sounds really inappropriately rude to me. But I wouldn't know.

How so?

I'm not trying to give you a hard time or be a dick, just surprised by the language.

To say that military servicemen fall along "a sliding scale of suck" and accuse a large number of trained marines or army of uselessness & cowardice in the field doesn't strike me as particularly respectful or accurate. These people go under rigorous training prior to deployment and while a lot of them have severe mental health issues in the wake of seeing combat, when they are in the operation coming under fire or making a field scan the conduct is at a pretty high quality. That, plus the tech, was presumably why we have such (relatively) low fatalities considering the number of conflicts engaged in at once.

If you served you would actually know unlike me so maybe you're right. It's just not the message friends and acquaintances with Afghanistan tours convey.

First off, I think we, as a society, need to be careful about being "too respectful" of the military profession. I mean, what's our record since WW2, 5-1-4? And 4 of our 5 wins were against countries with less than 10 million people. Not a slight against those who have served, but at some point we have to question the effectiveness of the "rigorous training" and the accuracy of the reports of "conduct is at a pretty high quality". I personally know a ton of dudes in Central Asia and the Middle East who would beg to differ.

Casualty rates, for units "in the shit" are about what they have been in most major conflicts, if all casualties are treated the same. You are very correct in saying that tech and training have dramatically lessened fatalities. Anecdotally speaking, just over 50% of the dudes in the last unit I deployed with had Purple Hearts (either from that deployment or from a previous one). Many minor wounds or incidents today would be fatal back in the day, thank you science.

Its sort of a weird dichotomy in that there isn't "that much" fighting, especially compared to like, the Eastern Front 1943, but a very small percentage of service members bear the brunt of it, yet everyone in the service enjoys the sterling, unquestionable reputation. The computer tech sergeant running a prostitution ring in Kuwait has the same validity and benefits as the 18 year old private on that Pakistani border trying to lead a squad because everyone more senior got smoked. I think "back in the day" when the army was mostly militia-volunteer (1974 and earlier) blanket credibility was appropriate, draftees and volunteers did the job they were told, no matter what it was, and generally performed in way that brought great credit to our nation. Today though, we spend 10x the amount of money per soldier than any other nation, and what is the return?

Dudes and dudettes that join the military in a time of persistent conflict should be commended. But we, as a society, should ask: is this sustainable, and is it effective? A citizen in a democracy should never feel bad questioning the performance of a well compensated government employee.

[Ron Don Volante]

tyft

[Wipfelder]

tyft

I'm here for you.

[timbs4339]

If OP is still listening, I'm really trying to track your logic.

You have no interest in working the most likely outcome from UNH, a 40-60K small firm or local/state government job in New Hampshire or maybe Maine/VT/MA. You seem interested in some sort of DOS or policy job where a JD is one thing that they say they look for, along with another type of thinky ready writy person degree or relevant work experience. You have no idea whether a UNH JD would beat out a relevant masters degree or two years WE.

Why do you want the JD instead of the master's degree? You don't seem to be interested in being a lawyer, i.e. the main "advantage" of the JD. If you're not planning on doing that, it seems a lot less risky to spend a couple years getting the masters degree, then ride that and your Penn BA to the policy job that you want. UNH curves to a B, so if you get median, you'll probably lose the scholly.

You haven't really articulated any alternative career where a JD would be helpful whereas a masters would not.