Is Law School a Losing Game?

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Unitas » Tue Jan 11, 2011 7:48 pm

JazzOne wrote:
Unitas wrote:
JazzOne wrote:One of our deans put up a graph during 1L orientation that compared the five least trusted professions in America. I don't know where the graph originally came from, but the news media ranked third, with lawyers second only to politicians.


It makes sense for lawyers to be hated and untrusted. Given that during any suit one party hates the other side's lawyers when they win. So in every suit the loser doesn't like lawyers. I am talking about personal suits for the most part and not corporations. Just a product of the adversary system.

I don't think corporate clients like lawyers any better.


I just thought corporate clients would understand the system better and thus be more understanding of the process and less likely to distrust them when it doesn't work out well. My bad.

User avatar
math101
Posts: 124
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby math101 » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:04 pm

worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.


+1

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby General Tso » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:07 pm

math101 wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.


+1


I'd love an articling system like they have in Canada. It is an internship sorta like residency in medicine. You article for 2 years earning around 35-40k and if you do a good job, they hire you on full time at around 60-65k. It is my impression that almost all Canadian law students get a chance to article. I'd love something similar in America where a young attorney is evaluated upon their work product and not upon their academic credentials alone. I don't feel entitled to a job, per se. But I DO feel like someone owes me a chance for the decades of education I have suffered through.

User avatar
mpj_3050
Posts: 372
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 9:59 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby mpj_3050 » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:26 pm

It is a good thing I came across TLS and started doing research about debt vs. opportunities. I will probably attend a TTT with some money and total debt of 30kish or less with money I have saved up. Schools I am looking at are in low cost areas and are not surrounded by vastly superior programs. Fewer jobs and lower pay? Yes, but at least I can keep debt low and stand an okay chance at getting a job at 40k starting.

Want to be a DA/PD or part of a small shop in fly-over country? Then yeah going to law school could be a good decision if you manage debt and expectations, and aren't leaving a great job. Coming from Ohio I know people at Toledo, Capital, and a couple other schools who assume 75k plus starting and thus took on 100k or more in debt. Also, they all assume that JD=job at graduation making above salaries. Is law school a losing game from them? Not as bad as the TJ School of Law Guy, but things aren't looking good for these folks.

Edit: of course this all assumes you have decent enough grades at a lower cost school to come away with something. Wouldn't surprise me if say only top half at say North Dakota ever got a job, just speculation I guess.

User avatar
James Bond
Posts: 2349
Joined: Sun May 31, 2009 12:53 am

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby James Bond » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:37 pm

Unitas wrote:I just thought corporate clients would understand the system better and thus be more understanding of the process and less likely to distrust them when it doesn't work out well. My bad.


Nah. As a corporate lawyer you're "back office" and most back office people are considered annoying since they don't bring in money for the company.

User avatar
HarlandBassett
Posts: 426
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 1:50 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby HarlandBassett » Tue Jan 11, 2011 8:49 pm

math101 wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.


+1


not inclusive of COL or grants/schollies...
120k for Cornell undergrad + $139,830 for Brooklyn Law = 260k approximately

I think I saw a NY-based thread somewhere (probably on Third Tier Toilet) that the most indebted students are those that have massive undergrad loans and then go to Brooklyn Law School (NYU undergrad + BLS was the most discussed) and then graduate without job prospects.

Trequartista
Posts: 136
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:26 am

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Trequartista » Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:25 pm

General Tso wrote:
math101 wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.


+1


I'd love an articling system like they have in Canada. It is an internship sorta like residency in medicine. You article for 2 years earning around 35-40k and if you do a good job, they hire you on full time at around 60-65k. It is my impression that almost all Canadian law students get a chance to article. I'd love something similar in America where a young attorney is evaluated upon their work product and not upon their academic credentials alone. I don't feel entitled to a job, per se. But I DO feel like someone owes me a chance for the decades of education I have suffered through.


Articling is only one year. The big firms in Toronto pay 70k for articles and 90k + for first year associates, salaries are lower in other cities, but not as low as your numbers.

User avatar
General Tso
Posts: 2289
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:51 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby General Tso » Tue Jan 11, 2011 9:57 pm

nael wrote:
General Tso wrote:
math101 wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.


+1


I'd love an articling system like they have in Canada. It is an internship sorta like residency in medicine. You article for 2 years earning around 35-40k and if you do a good job, they hire you on full time at around 60-65k. It is my impression that almost all Canadian law students get a chance to article. I'd love something similar in America where a young attorney is evaluated upon their work product and not upon their academic credentials alone. I don't feel entitled to a job, per se. But I DO feel like someone owes me a chance for the decades of education I have suffered through.


Articling is only one year. The big firms in Toronto pay 70k for articles and 90k + for first year associates, salaries are lower in other cities, but not as low as your numbers.


Even better then. I'd be happy to work at my low numbers.

(knew I should have made good on my emigration threats in 2003)

Miracle
Posts: 929
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 9:25 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Miracle » Tue Jan 11, 2011 11:31 pm

robotclubmember wrote:
Sammi wrote:
DEKOCARDS wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:He is the least sympathetic poster boy that could have been selected for what is, in actuality, a serious problem in the legal profession. The NYT wrote a good piece, but by writing about Wallerstein, it kind of undermines the point that many students are legitimately mislead by data that is borderline fiction, and that level of debt without any kind of viable job prospects is potentiall catastrophic to thousands of students. I think most people who go into law school really are honest people that want to pave their own way make a good living for themselves and honor their debts, but they are woefully misguided. Thanks to the NYT, and this Wallerstein yokel, we all look like a joke now.


I think it was the NYT's way of showing that it isn't entirely the legal education system's failure. There are a lot of complete idiots who go into law school blind and come out without a clue how to pay for the years of education wasted on them. I suppose they could have found a better example of someone who did their research and still got screwed to balance it out.


I think we all know that there are folks that are in this forum who got their 16* and have high hopes, will take out hundreds of thousands to pay for the best school they can, will end up bottom of their class, and will have to shoulder a load of debt. It's in the stats. You can't think that everyone is in the top of their class, that everyone is employed, and that everyone makes $150k. I find it interesting that TLS is an area that fosters blind optimism when it comes to after law school success.


TLS fosters "blind optimism"? Lol. There's a new sky-is-falling type of post every day on this forum, complete with retake-trolling abound. I don't think this site fosters blind optimism.

Not everyone goes to this site though. Some students rely on the data that schools report. When people look at the employment stats for a reputable institution like Georgetown, do you think it occurs to them that those stats might be a lie? That GULC may be inflating it's numbers by offering temp positions in its admissions office? People inherently think that a respectable institution would have credible statistics, that they wouldn't massage their data to the point of bordering fiction, and that's a real problem.

Publicly traded companies have their financial statements audited, because if they aren't audited by an independent source, then a company could report whatever numbers they want, and shareholders wouldn't have reliable information to make investment decisions. Could you imagine what it would be like if we eliminated the SEC and all regulatory financial reporting requirements? Because that environment is exactly what the law school industry is like right now. There is no policing, no auditing, and schools can report whatever they want. We become stakeholders of a sort when we enroll at a school, so it's fair we should expect the data they report to not be lies, like the way investors expect financial statements not to be a bunch of fake numbers. There are stupid Wallersteins out there who will blow it for themselves one way or another, sure, but most of us want to make an honest living and expect a law school of all places to be ethical in reporting its data. When schools like GULC boast 94% employment rates with median salaries in the $150K range, I think it's fair to expect that that data is fair and accurate. 0L's, like me, would look at that and should be able to trust those numbers, and assume that everyone IS actually employed more or less. But no one attests to the fairness and accuracy of the data they report. That's not the fault of blindly optimistic 0L's. Law schools are lying and their reporting methods are unethical, and that's a serious issue. When they start reporting realistic data, I think you'll see a lot less students getting sucked into the debt quicksand which is law school. We have realistic data on McDonald's salaries, do you think people are busting their ass to get into the fast food industry? When law schools report honestly, this problem will start solving itself in a big way because 0L's will realize that getting admitted to a decent law school is NOT the winning lottery ticket that said law schools have unethically led them to believe. But that means less profit, so they have a huge incentive to basically lie to everyone in their data. I just don't think it's fair to blame that on the students though.


GULC is misrepresenting its employment statistics?

theghostofDrewTate
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 10:43 am

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby theghostofDrewTate » Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:01 am

Miracle wrote:GULC is misrepresenting its employment statistics?


I wouldn't say they are - they are probably within the guidelines when they report. However, I would guess that if you went up and down the hundreds of graduates per year they are churning out and ask if they think they are in the type of job they thought they would be in after graduation, a decent percentage would report back with a "no." The classes there are huge and being below median is not a good place to be coming out of there from what I have heard.

User avatar
robotclubmember
Posts: 743
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 7:53 am

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby robotclubmember » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:13 am

theghostofDrewTate wrote:
Miracle wrote:GULC is misrepresenting its employment statistics?


I wouldn't say they are - they are probably within the guidelines when they report. However, I would guess that if you went up and down the hundreds of graduates per year they are churning out and ask if they think they are in the type of job they thought they would be in after graduation, a decent percentage would report back with a "no." The classes there are huge and being below median is not a good place to be coming out of there from what I have heard.


"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Unitas » Wed Jan 12, 2011 8:59 am

robotclubmember wrote:"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.


I don't want to defend my school on this too much, because maybe they do do bad things in this regard, but:

The article wrote: A spokeswoman for the school said that none of these grads were counted as “employed” as a result of these hourly jobs.


And besides that comment; three students out of 450 (or however many responded) is insignificant; a .6% increase of respondents is statistically meaningless. If anything this was to give students a resume filler. The worst thing to have is an empty resume for a year after graduation.

User avatar
observationalist
Posts: 472
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:55 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby observationalist » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:08 am

robotclubmember wrote:
theghostofDrewTate wrote:
Miracle wrote:GULC is misrepresenting its employment statistics?


I wouldn't say they are - they are probably within the guidelines when they report. However, I would guess that if you went up and down the hundreds of graduates per year they are churning out and ask if they think they are in the type of job they thought they would be in after graduation, a decent percentage would report back with a "no." The classes there are huge and being below median is not a good place to be coming out of there from what I have heard.


"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.


Excellent point... Bill Henderson pointed this out at the Questionnaire Committee hearing down in Ft Lauderdale. He basically said that law schools are run by lawyers, who by training are there to figure out how to work around the guidelines without getting the school in any legal trouble. I would argue most professors aren't really lawyers but I assume he was talking more about the career services/admissions people.

FYI the guidelines boil down to Standard 509 and the Interpretations. So long as schools are being honest about their bar passage percentages and employment rates (in terms of how many people have 'a job' of any sort), they're likely operating within Standard 509. This explains it a little further: --LinkRemoved--

User avatar
observationalist
Posts: 472
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:55 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby observationalist » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:23 am

Unitas wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.


I don't want to defend my school on this too much, because maybe they do do bad things in this regard, but:

The article wrote: A spokeswoman for the school said that none of these grads were counted as “employed” as a result of these hourly jobs.


And besides that comment; three students out of 450 (or however many responded) is insignificant; a .6% increase of respondents is statistically meaningless. If anything this was to give students a resume filler. The worst thing to have is an empty resume for a year after graduation.


One of the other things Henderson has done (he's a great guy) is show the disproportionate effect a slight change in employment rate has on a school's overall ranking. A 0.6% drop when all other schools hold constant could boot GULC out of the T14. Specifically, he claims that "a very small change in a school’s employed-at-nine-months data can produce a drop of ten or more places in the U.S. News rankings." (can't find the source article, but an Ohio attorney who has been writing a lot about these issues cited it as coming from a piece Hendo wrote in the NALP bulletin): --LinkRemoved--

User avatar
Unitas
Posts: 1387
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:03 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Unitas » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:38 am

observationalist wrote:
Unitas wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.


I don't want to defend my school on this too much, because maybe they do do bad things in this regard, but:

The article wrote: A spokeswoman for the school said that none of these grads were counted as “employed” as a result of these hourly jobs.

And besides that comment; three students out of 450 (or however many responded) is insignificant; a .6% increase of respondents is statistically meaningless. If anything this was to give students a resume filler. The worst thing to have is an empty resume for a year after graduation.


One of the other things Henderson has done (he's a great guy) is show the disproportionate effect a slight change in employment rate has on a school's overall ranking. A 0.6% drop when all other schools hold constant could boot GULC out of the T14. Specifically, he claims that "a very small change in a school’s employed-at-nine-months data can produce a drop of ten or more places in the U.S. News rankings." (can't find the source article, but an Ohio attorney who has been writing a lot about these issues cited it as coming from a piece Hendo wrote in the NALP bulletin): --LinkRemoved--


That still doesn't negate the fact the school didn't count them as employed according to the article. I didn't realize it would make that big of a difference, but again the article says they didn't count them as employed due to that employment. I am going on what the article said and they may have done something bad along with every other school, but nothing in that article would indicate GULC needing to be called out.

I agree with what you guys are trying to do, but the battles NYtimes picked were the wrong ones: i.e. picking out a school and saying they offered three part time jobs that didn't impact the survey, with the article making it make it appear as they did add them to the survey, saying a student graduated from a LS he did not, and not trying to get to the heart of the matter (too many schools, unlimited student loans, and fuzzy requirements for employment stats). Attacking any one school in these instances is counter-productive, especially when the attacks seem disingenuous or manipulated.

User avatar
ResolutePear
Posts: 8614
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 10:07 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby ResolutePear » Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:44 am

One of my prof's brought this article up in class. It was win.

Look guys, rising tuition cost and all that jazz is a good thing. Eventually the market will weed out itself and law will be prohibitively expensive/strict that only those who really want to work with law will actually attempt/succeed-in it.

User avatar
observationalist
Posts: 472
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 12:55 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby observationalist » Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:14 am

Unitas wrote:
observationalist wrote:
Unitas wrote:
robotclubmember wrote:"Within guidelines" doesn't mean it isn't misrepresented when the guidelines are as weak as they are. Counting people who have a 6-week temp job looking at admissions applications as "employed" seems like misrepresentation to me.


I don't want to defend my school on this too much, because maybe they do do bad things in this regard, but:

The article wrote: A spokeswoman for the school said that none of these grads were counted as “employed” as a result of these hourly jobs.

And besides that comment; three students out of 450 (or however many responded) is insignificant; a .6% increase of respondents is statistically meaningless. If anything this was to give students a resume filler. The worst thing to have is an empty resume for a year after graduation.


One of the other things Henderson has done (he's a great guy) is show the disproportionate effect a slight change in employment rate has on a school's overall ranking. A 0.6% drop when all other schools hold constant could boot GULC out of the T14. Specifically, he claims that "a very small change in a school’s employed-at-nine-months data can produce a drop of ten or more places in the U.S. News rankings." (can't find the source article, but an Ohio attorney who has been writing a lot about these issues cited it as coming from a piece Hendo wrote in the NALP bulletin): --LinkRemoved--


That still doesn't negate the fact the school didn't count them as employed according to the article. I didn't realize it would make that big of a difference, but again the article says they didn't count them as employed due to that employment. I am going on what the article said and they may have done something bad along with every other school, but nothing in that article would indicate GULC needing to be called out.

I agree with what you guys are trying to do, but the battles NYtimes picked were the wrong ones: i.e. picking out a school and saying they offered three part time jobs that didn't impact the survey, with the article making it make it appear as they did add them to the survey, saying a student graduated from a LS he did not, and not trying to get to the heart of the matter (too many schools, unlimited student loans, and fuzzy requirements for employment stats). Attacking any one school in these instances is counter-productive, especially when the attacks seem disingenuous or manipulated.


I completely agree that Segal didn't focus his attention on players that are more deserving of attention, whether it's a law school committing far worse atrocities than GULC or a graduate who's far more sympathetic than the people he profiled. Hopefully he writes on this again and explores the issues in more detail.

But I do think that highlighting any one school could help bring about some changes, at least if the focus were on how schools portray their data rather than how they juke the stats for U.S. News. The future risk of shaming would cause other schools to change what they're doing, and they'd do it a lot faster than if we all wait for the ABA to reform the standard.

User avatar
BrownBears09
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:48 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby BrownBears09 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:07 am

HarlandBassett wrote:
math101 wrote:
worldtraveler wrote:I'm most disgusted by the "I thought someone would hook me up with a job" mentality in the article. No, people don't just walk around and hand you jobs in any field. You actually have to apply and prove yourself. I see this even at my own law school with people who bitch that OCS didn't just hook them up with a summer job. There is a huge sense of entitlement among law students and maybe even our generation as a whole, and it scares me. No one owes you anything, no matter how fancy your degree is.

+1

not inclusive of COL or grants/schollies...
120k for Cornell undergrad + $139,830 for Brooklyn Law = 260k approximately

I think I saw a NY-based thread somewhere (probably on Third Tier Toilet) that the most indebted students are those that have massive undergrad loans and then go to Brooklyn Law School (NYU undergrad + BLS was the most discussed) and then graduate without job prospects.

Ivies are not good examples of UG debt because they distribute need-based grants (i.e. I paid 18k/yearly.)

User avatar
ggocat
Posts: 1663
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 1:51 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby ggocat » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:14 am

observationalist wrote:One of the other things Henderson has done (he's a great guy) is show the disproportionate effect a slight change in employment rate has on a school's overall ranking. A 0.6% drop when all other schools hold constant could boot GULC out of the T14. Specifically, he claims that "a very small change in a school’s employed-at-nine-months data can produce a drop of ten or more places in the U.S. News rankings." (can't find the source article, but an Ohio attorney who has been writing a lot about these issues cited it as coming from a piece Hendo wrote in the NALP bulletin): --LinkRemoved--

Seto's study confirms that 9-month employment rate is incredibly important. I'm sure you've read it, but others (e.g. unitas) have obviously not. Here it is: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm? ... _id=937017.

unitas wrote:
And besides that comment; three students out of 450 (or however many responded) is insignificant; a .6% increase of respondents is statistically meaningless. If anything this was to give students a resume filler. The worst thing to have is an empty resume for a year after graduation.

lol 0.6% is not "statistically meaningless."

User avatar
gwuorbust
Posts: 2087
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:37 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby gwuorbust » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:25 am

ResolutePear wrote:One of my prof's brought this article up in class. It was win.

Look guys, rising tuition cost and all that jazz is a good thing. Eventually the market will weed out itself and law will be prohibitively expensive/strict that only those who really want to work with law will actually attempt/succeed-in it.


If GULC tuition rose to 100k a year, would they still be able to fill the class?

rundoxierun
Posts: 1893
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 1:46 am

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby rundoxierun » Wed Jan 12, 2011 11:35 am

ResolutePear wrote:One of my prof's brought this article up in class. It was win.

Look guys, rising tuition cost and all that jazz is a good thing. Eventually the market will weed out itself and law will be prohibitively expensive/strict that only those who really want to work with law will actually attempt/succeed-in it.


Im assuming this isnt serious.. If it is serious, it is completely wrong. If law gets more expensive plenty of people who want to work to work with law and would succeed-in it would not go to law school because it would be financial suicide.

User avatar
txadv11
Posts: 922
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 3:06 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby txadv11 » Wed Jan 12, 2011 12:14 pm

I know that I am not rationally thinking this out, someone please respectfully tell me my reasoning is off:

2011 marks the beginning of "baby-boomer" retirees. Although I couldn't get the figure on the # of lawyers here, around 10,000 "boomers" will retire daily in the US for the next 1-2 decades.
My state, Texas, (the bar) claims roughly 75,000 practicing attorneys. Roughly one third of these lawyers are in the category of "practicing more than 25 years" This is the largest category, and adding in attorneys over 20 years, brings the number closer to half. The median number of years practicing is 18!

I understand that biglaw is extremely hard to get, and especially to keep very long. However, I have only ever been interested in public service, I mean, isn't a large portion of the complaints about the long-lost days of a 100,000+ salary and partner/firm issues? The article cites
New York Times, Is Law School A Losing Game? wrote:In reality, and based on every other source of information, Mr. Wallerstein and a generation of J.D.’s face the grimmest job market in decades. Since 2008, some 15,000 attorney and legal-staff jobs at large firms have vanished, according to a Northwestern Law study. Associates have been laid off, partners nudged out the door and recruitment programs have been scaled back or eliminated.

If the population is rising, and criminal justice related work cannot be outsourced, how is public service affected? I guess I could believe it is more competitive given the higher number of lawyers seeking employment. But add in the fact that I'll be going for a certificate (or program) directly in trial advocacy/criminal law along with the fact that I don't necessarily care which of the 254 counties I start in. Also I know even before I get in to school that future networking is geared towards the area of law.

As far as the debt itself, my top choice right now is roughly 18,000/yr (not counting any potential scholy) for tuition and the cost of living is only 75% of the national average. My second choice is only 9,500/yr for tuition and fees, and is still less than the national average for cost of living. I understand $43,000 (one figure the article gave) by three years, plus factoring atrocious living costs like in New York, or parts of California is the reason for "250,000" debt or even 150,000... What if tuition books and fees were 20,000 and living was another 10? I'd get out around 90K (less if my parents are going to help out) with a certificate in exactly what I want to do, in a market that has a reasonably high rate of retirement (the above biggest category above would be >29 yrs by the time I'm out). As an additional minor point, add in again the 10 year public service debt plan, and income based repayment.

Although I don't know my class rank or intern/externship situation now (but assuming I remain 100% committed to criminal law)....is law school a losing game for me just as it was for the people in the NYT article?

I try not to make assumptions, as I have put in as many real stats as possible, what am I missing?
Texas stats: http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm ... ntID=11230

plum
Posts: 291
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2010 2:21 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby plum » Wed Jan 12, 2011 1:51 pm

this is crazy.

Want A Great Job? Don't Go To Second-Tier Schools Like Columbia And MIT
http://www.businessinsider.com/harvard- ... ale-2011-1

ISTAND
Posts: 104
Joined: Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:31 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby ISTAND » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:01 pm

ResolutePear wrote:One of my prof's brought this article up in class. It was win.

Look guys, rising tuition cost and all that jazz is a good thing. Eventually the market will weed out itself and law will be prohibitively expensive/strict that only those who really want to work with law will actually attempt/succeed-in it.


It's already prohibitively expensive, which is why the majority of students take out student loans. They wouldn't do so if they didn't want to work in law, but when the schools they are applying to give out false employment information that is an area of concern. It's like asking $1000/night at a Marriott only to shack the person up in a sleazy motel in a bad part of town. It doesn't mean the person didn't want to stay in a hotel room, just that they were DECEIVED into what it entailed. But I can see you don't get this, it's gone over your...head. You think you're the only one who really wants to practice law and if anyone did too then they'd be ok with lies and deception rather than shut up and dole out the dough. Very immature, and annoying, not that you care of course.

User avatar
Kswizzie
Posts: 153
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 8:54 pm

Re: Is Law School a Losing Game?

Postby Kswizzie » Wed Jan 12, 2011 2:10 pm

Make student loans deferable. Companies will think harder about who to give loans to. Only people who stand a reasonable chance of paying their loans back will get loans. problem solved.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests