cattleprod wrote:JusticeHarlan wrote:I don't think you know what a Ponzi scheme is.cattleprod wrote:Most of those criminal law schools are just Ponzi schemes living off of new investors (aka students) to payoff those at the top of the scam (law school profs and deans).
I don't care. 80% to 90% of the law schools are producing fraudulent data on employment and salary for their graduates.
It is a scam and that is the bottom line.
Students are the new investors that are getting $100,000 to $200,000 stolen from them.
The money eventually goes to the criminals at the top (law profs and deans) who are perpetuating the scam.
They perpetuate the scheme with the fake employment and salary stats which omit key data points.
Here is a classic example from last week. Aaron Nathaniel Taylor, “Law Professor” at St. Louis University wrote this article making the unbelievable statement that lawyer unemployment is 1.5%.
http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/w ... l-worth-it
Give me a phucking break. These people need to be sent to jail for the financial fraud they are committing.
Fraudulent statements like that (1.5% unemployment) and fake 9 months employment stats and false median salaries, perpetuate this scam to bring in more unwitting investors (aka students).
That is equivalent to sending fake monthly financial statements to your investors (aka students). Or it is the same as producing a fraudulent prospectus for your investors. They produce the fake data claiming 90% to 100% employment within 9 months to falsely lure freah meat into the student loan debt trap.
Any other business would be sued by a state AG or the DoJ for this type of activity.
Apparently you don't know what reading is either. The 1.5% unemployment rate is a number produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, not any sort of law school. That number is probably relatively accurate, though it excludes people who are not looking now, but may be looking later, etc. Also, I don't know the BLS's methodology, but I'm betting that the "lawyer unemployment rate" is a measure of people of people who were previously employed as lawyers, not people with a JD. Thus, it excludes people graduating from TTTT schools who never get a "lawyer job" in the first place. Professor Taylor's point is that the legal profession is very stable and that if you get into it, you are shielded from much of the current recession.
IN THE VERY NEXT PARAGRAPH, he acknowledges the relative difficulty of breaking into the legal field, citing statistics produced by NALP, not any law school. Those stats show that 87.6% of 2010 grads were employed within nine months. When you consider that TTTT students and students not passing the bar are dragging that down, students at T1/T2 schools have employment prospects that are on par with the rest of the economy, if not better. Moving up to the T25 and T14, you're looking at employment rates that are likely over 95%, if not close to 99%.
Law schools (just like everyone else) use the rosiest lenses to show their students the legal market. That's just shrewd marketing. It's not fraud. It's not a Ponzi scheme. Just like with all important decisions in life, one should get information from a variety of sources. You don't go out and buy a Hyundai just because their commercials said it was rated higher than an Audi.
While I don't expect any of this will change the absurd content or Chicken Little tone of your view, I hope this will help the people lurking this thread to get a more accurate perspective.