Warning to all 0L's

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
Indifferent
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Indifferent » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:03 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:
Indifferent wrote:
cattleprod wrote:90%-95% of new lawyers are not making $100,000+ and never will.

No. Hard data makes you wrong.

Image


You forgot this part.

"Note: The graph above is based on 18,398 salaries. A few salaries above $200,000 are excluded for clarity. The left-hand peaks of the graph reflect salaries of $40,000 to $65,000, which collectively accounted for about 48% of reported salaries. The right-hand peak shows that salaries of $160,000 accounted for about 18% of reported salaries. However, more complete salary coverage for jobs at large law firms heightens this peak and diminishes the left-hand peaks — and shows that the unadjusted mean overstates the average starting salary by about 9%. Nonetheless, as both the arithmetic mean and the adjusted mean show, relatively few salaries are close to either mean figure. For purposes of this graph, all reported salaries were rounded to the nearest $5,000."

Less than half of grads from that class reported data. The NALP also reported that 25% of that class is only working part time legal jobs. Add on top of that that the unemployment rates of that class are at an all time high for law school grads. Who do you think is more likely to respond to such a survey, the people making 160k or the ones making 30k? If that chart is truly representative of salaries for that class, then about 8,000 members of that class are making > 160k, which of course is not true at all.

Reading comprehension will show you that cattleprod claimed that 90%-95% of new lawyers (not law school graduates) were not making 100k starting, or ever, for that matter. I was responding to that statement. If you can find a more reliable source of data on how many lawyers were actually hired in 2010 please enlighten me.

As for your claim that there are not 8000 lawyers starting at 160k, likely true. However, look for a minute at the hiring numbers reported by the NYC offices of the V15 firms:

Wachtell: 17
Cravath: 62
SC: 90
Skadden: 26 (although many seem to have been deferred, expected hires for 2011 are at 105)
DPW: 78
STB: 48
Weil: 54 (again, there seem to have been deferrals as expected hires for 2011 are at 103)
Cleary: 81
Covington: 6
Latham: 52
K&E: 37
Debevoise: 66
Paul Weiss: 83
W&C - No NYC office
Gibson: 40
Sidley: 28

The Vault 15 NYC offices alone account for 768 hires in 2010 (any maybe closer to 850 if deferrals are counted). I am not sure what all of NYC looks like, but I would imagine there were about 2000 entry level attorneys hired at 160k in 2010. I am going to assume it is safe to double that for other major markets and minor markets starting associates at 160k. That's 4000, or 10% of 40,000. Including the smattering of firms across the country in major and minor markets that pay less than 160k but more than 100k, it's not too far of a stretch to guess that at least 8000 (or more) attorneys started at over 100k, which is 20%.

In any event, I was responding to cattleprod's absurd assertion, not to the general warning that going to law school for many people is a bad decision. 20% is still ridiculously low and I agree that the decision to attend law school in this economy (and possibly in this day and age) should be one that is given extensive consideration.

User avatar
glitter178
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:21 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby glitter178 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:06 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:Don't go to law school anytime within at least the next five years. Even with a full scholly or acceptance to HYS. I am speaking on behalf of the legal profession as a whole. There are too many lawyers and we don't need anymore at the moment. There are nearly twice as many lawyers in this country as there are legal jobs available. You are not needed, you are not special, you are not necessary. Want to help the poor? Go do it. Want to help change the world? Go do it. Want to make money? Go attempt to do it. A legal education is not necessary for any of these.

Quite frankly, about 90% of those in law school shouldn't be there to begin with. If you are unsure what you want to do with your life, law school is not the answer. It is not a second chance at finding yourself. It is not college 2.0. It is a professional school for a profession not needing any more people in it at the moment.

To those of you planning on taking out loans. DON'T. It is not a good investment and student loans are both killing the economy and the futures of those who take them out. You can't get rid of them, you're an indentured servant. You can't discharge them in bankruptcy.

This warning is especially being directed at those coming straight from undergrad. Don't waste your 20's on law school and the legal field. For those of you reading who think this is good advice for the thousands of 0L's who don't totally know what they are doing, but since you got a 170+ and are 26 you are the exception, this still applies to you. Even if you do everything right, we still don't need you. Won't for a while. Go do something else.

Sincerely,
The Ghost of Christmas Future



yes, because since you came first, you deserve it and we don't. GTFO

Schola
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Schola » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:07 pm

CynicusRex wrote:
Schola wrote:I'm sure the list could go on, but these aren't the issues at stake here. The question is whether it is a bad idea to go to T14, or even YHS, even w/ a full ride.
. . .
I have yet to see any proof that YHS, or even CCN, or perhaps even T14 graduates are setting themselves up for a penurious life. Sure, some might be pushed into public interest when they wanted to go private, but w/ generous loan forgiveness programs, this will still result in a relatively comfortable lifestyle (unless, of course, you need 3 homes and a 120 foot yacht to be comfortable).

If anyone has proof that a degree from YHS, CCN, or any T14 school will likely, or possibly, lead to unemployment, please share. If not, let's just end this thread.


That's not "the question"; CCN and YHS give out a miniscule amount of full rides. You're reducing a question that is an important one for 99% of prospective law students to one that only applies to 1% of them.

Speaking as someone who actually practices, YHS and you'll probably be safe, but anything under that and you're taking a big risk. In NYC there are plenty of NYU and Columbia grads, for example, unable to find work. Go further down on the T14 list and it gets even worse; a Georgetown JD is worth very little these days, my firm gets Georgetown people applying for jobs and their resumes are sad; contract work, doc review, volunteer work, etc.



You're right to hone in on my poor use of syntax. But I think we are in agreement. What I meant to say is that the questions are: 1) whether it is a bad idea to go to a T14 at all; and further 2) if it is a bad idea to go to a T14 even w/ a healthy scholarship. Of course this still excludes a majority of prospective law students, but I don't think any of us here would accept that it is prudent to go to law school if you don't go to a T14, or at least first tier school, except in exceptional circumstances (e.g. you plan to wind up in a rural market where a regional school dominates and get a full ride to that school).

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby JamMasterJ » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:09 pm

Indifferent wrote:Reading comprehension will show you that cattleprod claimed that 90%-95% of new lawyers

90%-95% of new lawyers are not making $100,000+ and never will

Explain to me how this graph is not applicable when referring to all lawyers if the dude was talking about how people never will reach a certain point

Schola
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Schola » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:11 pm

tlstlstls73 wrote:
LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:
tlstlstls73 wrote:Whatever. Whiners like OP are just mad because law school isn't a golden ticket for imaginationless lemmings who don't know what to do with their lives anymore. Boo hoo, sorry. If you are willing to make big bets and take big risks, and are prepared for striking out and being 200k in debt, you can go outside T14 and roll the dice. I did, and it worked out for me. It will always work out for some people---and winning the lottery sure feels nice.


You're assuming it didn't work out for the OP. You're assuming the OP went to a TTT at sticker, does doc review if has a legal job at all, lives with his parents, and completely regrets law school. You're assuming the OP also is subscribed to Third Tier Reality, Above the Law, and JDU. What if the OP has sound legal employment with a biglaw firm? What if, like I said I was, truly speaking on behalf of the legal community? Judging from your post you sound like a newly minted JD. Give it a few years, work your way up the ladder, then come back to me. Just hope you don't get laid off within the next five months and realize how bad it is out there when you're just another face in the crowd.


I hope so too bro! BTW, if you really are strait chillin' as you say, why would you begrudge others who want to jump off a cliff? How does it affect you?


While I think that the OP overstated his case, do you really mean to suggest that you can't fathom why someone might have concern for other people, even if their decisions don't have any direct bearing on his life?

User avatar
glitter178
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:21 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby glitter178 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:13 pm

he (she?) doesn't have concern for others, he has concern for himself.

Schola
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2011 3:55 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Schola » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:24 pm

glitter178 wrote:he (she?) doesn't have concern for others, he has concern for himself.


That may be the case, but I think it is unfair to presume. As someone who is completing his Ph.D. and has now taught many an undergrad, I can say that many people don't quite see that they are making imprudent career plans. Trying to suggest to them that they might want to think a bit harder before going down a path that one may not be able to get off of (b/c of debt, over qualification, whatever), is difficult, b/c it sometimes comes off as if you are trying to spit on their dreams.

As I stand on the threshold of matriculating at law school the roles are a bit reversed, and I can say that I am grateful to people who point out the potential pitfalls of what I am doing. I really want to practice law, and I will probably still go to law school, but I want to be sure I make that decision with as perfect an understanding of the situation as I can possibly get.

User avatar
Indifferent
Posts: 234
Joined: Thu Sep 15, 2011 10:04 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Indifferent » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:32 pm

JamMasterJ wrote:
Indifferent wrote:Reading comprehension will show you that cattleprod claimed that 90%-95% of new lawyers

90%-95% of new lawyers are not making $100,000+ and never will

Explain to me how this graph is not applicable when referring to all lawyers if the dude was talking about how people never will reach a certain point

Lawschoolreality pointed out that the graph is representative of only about 20k new attorneys, while the number of 2010 graduates from law schools is more along the lines of 40k people. I was pointing out that cattleprod claimed that 'new lawyers' (i.e. people who were actually hired by legal employers) never made that much, not that 'law graduates' never made that much. The difference being that not all people who graduate law school (remember, Florida Coastal graduates about 700 students every year) are going to be employed as lawyers, whether by preference or otherwise.

User avatar
glitter178
Posts: 771
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 8:21 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby glitter178 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:39 pm

Schola wrote:
glitter178 wrote:he (she?) doesn't have concern for others, he has concern for himself.


That may be the case, but I think it is unfair to presume. As someone who is completing his Ph.D. and has now taught many an undergrad, I can say that many people don't quite see that they are making imprudent career plans. Trying to suggest to them that they might want to think a bit harder before going down a path that one may not be able to get off of (b/c of debt, over qualification, whatever), is difficult, b/c it sometimes comes off as if you are trying to spit on their dreams.

As I stand on the threshold of matriculating at law school the roles are a bit reversed, and I can say that I am grateful to people who point out the potential pitfalls of what I am doing. I really want to practice law, and I will probably still go to law school, but I want to be sure I make that decision with as perfect an understanding of the situation as I can possibly get.


the OP isn't advice. or maybe it's teetering on the edge of being advice, but it's terrible advice. there are plenty of people who don't have full scholarships to HYS who are in law school, offers in hand. OP is suggesting that there are about 40 people who should go to law school-- that's ridiculous.

User avatar
JamMasterJ
Posts: 6688
Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby JamMasterJ » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:44 pm

Indifferent wrote:
JamMasterJ wrote:
Indifferent wrote:Reading comprehension will show you that cattleprod claimed that 90%-95% of new lawyers

90%-95% of new lawyers are not making $100,000+ and never will

Explain to me how this graph is not applicable when referring to all lawyers if the dude was talking about how people never will reach a certain point

Lawschoolreality pointed out that the graph is representative of only about 20k new attorneys, while the number of 2010 graduates from law schools is more along the lines of 40k people. I was pointing out that cattleprod claimed that 'new lawyers' (i.e. people who were actually hired by legal employers) never made that much, not that 'law graduates' never made that much. The difference being that not all people who graduate law school (remember, Florida Coastal graduates about 700 students every year) are going to be employed as lawyers, whether by preference or otherwise.

I see what you mean. We may not be on the same page

iowalum
Posts: 326
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 5:15 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby iowalum » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:45 pm

glitter178 wrote:
LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:Don't go to law school anytime within at least the next five years. Even with a full scholly or acceptance to HYS. I am speaking on behalf of the legal profession as a whole. There are too many lawyers and we don't need anymore at the moment. There are nearly twice as many lawyers in this country as there are legal jobs available. You are not needed, you are not special, you are not necessary. Want to help the poor? Go do it. Want to help change the world? Go do it. Want to make money? Go attempt to do it. A legal education is not necessary for any of these.

Quite frankly, about 90% of those in law school shouldn't be there to begin with. If you are unsure what you want to do with your life, law school is not the answer. It is not a second chance at finding yourself. It is not college 2.0. It is a professional school for a profession not needing any more people in it at the moment.

To those of you planning on taking out loans. DON'T. It is not a good investment and student loans are both killing the economy and the futures of those who take them out. You can't get rid of them, you're an indentured servant. You can't discharge them in bankruptcy.

This warning is especially being directed at those coming straight from undergrad. Don't waste your 20's on law school and the legal field. For those of you reading who think this is good advice for the thousands of 0L's who don't totally know what they are doing, but since you got a 170+ and are 26 you are the exception, this still applies to you. Even if you do everything right, we still don't need you. Won't for a while. Go do something else.

Sincerely,
The Ghost of Christmas Future



yes, because since you came first, you deserve it and we don't. GTFO


This. Seriously. Get over yourself.

User avatar
LAWSCHOOLREALITY
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:00 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby LAWSCHOOLREALITY » Tue Oct 18, 2011 2:59 pm

glitter178 wrote:
Schola wrote:
glitter178 wrote:he (she?) doesn't have concern for others, he has concern for himself.


That may be the case, but I think it is unfair to presume. As someone who is completing his Ph.D. and has now taught many an undergrad, I can say that many people don't quite see that they are making imprudent career plans. Trying to suggest to them that they might want to think a bit harder before going down a path that one may not be able to get off of (b/c of debt, over qualification, whatever), is difficult, b/c it sometimes comes off as if you are trying to spit on their dreams.

As I stand on the threshold of matriculating at law school the roles are a bit reversed, and I can say that I am grateful to people who point out the potential pitfalls of what I am doing. I really want to practice law, and I will probably still go to law school, but I want to be sure I make that decision with as perfect an understanding of the situation as I can possibly get.


the OP isn't advice. or maybe it's teetering on the edge of being advice, but it's terrible advice. there are plenty of people who don't have full scholarships to HYS who are in law school, offers in hand. OP is suggesting that there are about 40 people who should go to law school-- that's ridiculous.


Wrong. I never said don't go to law school. I said don't go to law school right now, or within the next few years. If it was up to those in the legal community, we would put at least a two year admissions freeze on all law schools. There simply isn't a need for more lawyers at the moment. Obviously we can't do that so we're just waiting for you to waste three of years of life and thousands of dollars to then curb the glut of lawyers with extremely slim hiring opportunities. Just remember, and I hate to say this, once you leave the classroom and are done competing with your classmates, you have several hundred thousand other lawyers looking for employment to compete with. Plus side to new grads, young and easy to mold. Plus side for unemployed recent grads/older lawyers, will desperately work for peanuts. Both are dispensable at the moment. Sorry if it's not what you want to hear.

User avatar
skers
Posts: 4950
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:33 am

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby skers » Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:23 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:
glitter178 wrote:
Schola wrote:
glitter178 wrote:he (she?) doesn't have concern for others, he has concern for himself.


That may be the case, but I think it is unfair to presume. As someone who is completing his Ph.D. and has now taught many an undergrad, I can say that many people don't quite see that they are making imprudent career plans. Trying to suggest to them that they might want to think a bit harder before going down a path that one may not be able to get off of (b/c of debt, over qualification, whatever), is difficult, b/c it sometimes comes off as if you are trying to spit on their dreams.

As I stand on the threshold of matriculating at law school the roles are a bit reversed, and I can say that I am grateful to people who point out the potential pitfalls of what I am doing. I really want to practice law, and I will probably still go to law school, but I want to be sure I make that decision with as perfect an understanding of the situation as I can possibly get.


the OP isn't advice. or maybe it's teetering on the edge of being advice, but it's terrible advice. there are plenty of people who don't have full scholarships to HYS who are in law school, offers in hand. OP is suggesting that there are about 40 people who should go to law school-- that's ridiculous.


Wrong. I never said don't go to law school. I said don't go to law school right now, or within the next few years. If it was up to those in the legal community, we would put at least a two year admissions freeze on all law schools. There simply isn't a need for more lawyers at the moment. Obviously we can't do that so we're just waiting for you to waste three of years of life and thousands of dollars to then curb the glut of lawyers with extremely slim hiring opportunities. Just remember, and I hate to say this, once you leave the classroom and are done competing with your classmates, you have several hundred thousand other lawyers looking for employment to compete with. Plus side to new grads, young and easy to mold. Plus side for unemployed recent grads/older lawyers, will desperately work for peanuts. Both are dispensable at the moment. Sorry if it's not what you want to hear.


I'm guessing that there are probably better outcomes available for current t-13 grads than unemployed recent grads and older lawyers just by nature of how the current system works.

User avatar
JusticeHarlan
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 2:56 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby JusticeHarlan » Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:29 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:
Schola wrote:While I agree that this is a dumb thread, I'm going to continue it anyway b/c it could potentially yield interesting info.

So, we are all in agreement that:
1) There are too many lawyers
2) The legal profession is shrinking due to outsourcing, e-discovery, etc.
3) Many, if not most, of the people who are going to law school shouldn't.
4) Law schools are perpetuating this problem b/c law schools produce big bucks for colleges
5) Going to a TTT is almost always, if not always, a bad idea
I'm sure the list could go on, but these aren't the issues at stake here. The question is whether it is a bad idea to go to T14, or even YHS, even w/ a full ride.

I have yet to see any proof that YHS, or even CCN, or perhaps even T14 graduates are setting themselves up for a penurious life. Sure, some might be pushed into public interest when they wanted to go private, but w/ generous loan forgiveness programs, this will still result in a relatively comfortable lifestyle (unless, of course, you need 3 homes and a 120 foot yacht to be comfortable).

If anyone has proof that a degree from YHS, CCN, or any T14 school will likely, or possibly, lead to unemployment, please share. If not, let's just end this thread.


http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... _first_job

Read the comments section

Super representative survey bro.

User avatar
Odd Future Wolf Gang
Posts: 1731
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:36 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Odd Future Wolf Gang » Tue Oct 18, 2011 3:58 pm

shoeshine wrote:I really wish everyone who was negative just to be negative about the current legal economy would just GTFO TLS. We are all aware of the state of the economy. No need to rehash this shit everyday.


I think people are aware that they are taking a huge risk by going to law school, but I am not sure if people really believe it. That is, I don't think they really believe that getting ITE-pwned could happen to them. Kind of like how people are "aware" that they could die at any moment, but no one really believes that some shit like that could happen to them. Because if people really believed that they could die at any moment, I don't think any reasonable person would be doing half the shit that they are doing right now at this very moment (me making this post for strangers on the internet, for example).

I sometimes wonder what it would be like if we could see who all the "Anonymous" posters are in the Legal Employment section. It would be kind of funny (in a tragic way) to compare their posts from a year ago when they were all "YAY Law School!" and their current ones like "ANY FIRMS STILL HIRING?" I feel like that would make the ITE thing more "real" for a lot people.

With that said, I will be going to law school lol.

cattleprod
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:18 am

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby cattleprod » Tue Oct 18, 2011 4:35 pm

Indifferent wrote:Reading comprehension will show you that cattleprod claimed that 90%-95% of new lawyers (not law school graduates) were not making 100k starting, or ever, for that matter. I was responding to that statement. If you can find a more reliable source of data on how many lawyers were actually hired in 2010 please enlighten me.


Law schools grads = new lawyers. Most of them eventually pass a bar somewhere before they drift off into oblivion of no job and no JD future.

You are leaving out the large number law school grads that never find any JD required legal job.
Considering only those that reported their numbers is the key criticism of law school fake stats in US News
Of 45,000 annual law school grads and it is estimated that as many as half of them never find JD required employment.
That dramatically impacts the median of fresh meat JDs.

User avatar
Richie Tenenbaum
Posts: 2162
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Richie Tenenbaum » Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:00 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:Wrong. I never said don't go to law school. I said don't go to law school right now, or within the next few years. If it was up to those in the legal community, we would put at least a two year admissions freeze on all law schools. There simply isn't a need for more lawyers at the moment. Obviously we can't do that so we're just waiting for you to waste three of years of life and thousands of dollars to then curb the glut of lawyers with extremely slim hiring opportunities. Just remember, and I hate to say this, once you leave the classroom and are done competing with your classmates, you have several hundred thousand other lawyers looking for employment to compete with. Plus side to new grads, young and easy to mold. Plus side for unemployed recent grads/older lawyers, will desperately work for peanuts. Both are dispensable at the moment. Sorry if it's not what you want to hear.

Sorry but you're wrong--there still is a need for legal hiring just because of how biglaw hiring works. Those past graduates who unemployed are pretty much shut out of biglaw. Why? Biglaw simply moves on to the new grads. Would it be better for the profession if it didn't work this way? Maybe, but all I'm focused on is how it currently works. 2Ls are competing against other 2Ls (and a few 3Ls) for future biglaw jobs right now...not the previous grads who are unemployed.

Now, is legal hiring ITE that good right now for 2Ls? Not really, it's pretty rough, depending on what school you go to. If you go to YHS though, you prob landed something already for the summer. If you go to CCN, there's a good chance you got something. Going to HYS or CCN on a full-ride seems pretty rational to me. Most if not all of the T14 seems pretty rational to me for a lot of people. Stop spewing your absolutist bullshit. It's not going to suddenly change how legal hiring works. Maybe focus your energy on convincing biglaw to hire the cast offs from previous years.

User avatar
Samara
Posts: 3245
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 4:26 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby Samara » Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:55 pm

At T14 schools, even ITE, 50-60% get biglaw-level salaries, 15-25% get clerkships/PI/gov't, 5-10% get boutiques/midlaw, and 5-10% want academia/business/etc., right? That means a T14 grad is looking at a 75% chance at worst of achieving high-level placement and probably closer to 85-90% or higher. If a matriculant has a little WE and is not a total aspie, their chances are even better. So, how again is T14 a terrible decision?

xmrmckenziex
Posts: 56
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 12:26 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby xmrmckenziex » Tue Oct 18, 2011 5:58 pm

Aren't we missing a huge point as well. What if you just want to BE a lawyer? I've grown tired of the purely cooked, empirical discussion of the occupation. I also hate to sound super elitist but argumentation through discussion of the averages seems to fall on deaf ears here. I mean I would assume that most people here have very high aspirations and will reach them accordingly. While I agree the jobs may not be there for an enormous percentage of people; its not like the best and brightest in a career field are suddenly going to be unemployable.

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18424
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby bk1 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:00 pm

Samara wrote:So, how again is T14 a terrible decision?


Because very few of them satisfy either of these:

Samara wrote:If a matriculant has a little WE and is not a total aspie.

AriGoldButNicer
Posts: 367
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2011 2:19 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby AriGoldButNicer » Tue Oct 18, 2011 7:46 pm

JusticeHarlan wrote:
LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:
Schola wrote:While I agree that this is a dumb thread, I'm going to continue it anyway b/c it could potentially yield interesting info.

So, we are all in agreement that:
1) There are too many lawyers
2) The legal profession is shrinking due to outsourcing, e-discovery, etc.
3) Many, if not most, of the people who are going to law school shouldn't.
4) Law schools are perpetuating this problem b/c law schools produce big bucks for colleges
5) Going to a TTT is almost always, if not always, a bad idea
I'm sure the list could go on, but these aren't the issues at stake here. The question is whether it is a bad idea to go to T14, or even YHS, even w/ a full ride.

I have yet to see any proof that YHS, or even CCN, or perhaps even T14 graduates are setting themselves up for a penurious life. Sure, some might be pushed into public interest when they wanted to go private, but w/ generous loan forgiveness programs, this will still result in a relatively comfortable lifestyle (unless, of course, you need 3 homes and a 120 foot yacht to be comfortable).

If anyone has proof that a degree from YHS, CCN, or any T14 school will likely, or possibly, lead to unemployment, please share. If not, let's just end this thread.


http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/ ... _first_job

Read the comments section

Super representative survey bro.

Dude, a bunch of the people you're bringing in are mentally ill, seriously.

One guy writes about killing himself, the anti-depressants, etc, etc., how he stood on a platform in NYC threatening to leap in front of a subway. He's never gotten a legal job. No wonder why - he is a looney tune! Who'd hire him even if he was the top of HYS???? I also wouldn't agree law school made him like that. I come from a family of financial woes, know many people with them, yet no one's threatened to jump in front of a subway.

And other witnesses are just as psycho.

This is like the 80% of CNN posters who think 9/11 is a conspiracy being representative of 9/11 being a conspiracy.

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

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby romothesavior » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:34 pm

LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:Wrong. I never said don't go to law school. I said don't go to law school right now, or within the next few years. If it was up to those in the legal community, we would put at least a two year admissions freeze on all law schools. There simply isn't a need for more lawyers at the moment. Obviously we can't do that so we're just waiting for you to waste three of years of life and thousands of dollars to then curb the glut of lawyers with extremely slim hiring opportunities. Just remember, and I hate to say this, once you leave the classroom and are done competing with your classmates, you have several hundred thousand other lawyers looking for employment to compete with. Plus side to new grads, young and easy to mold. Plus side for unemployed recent grads/older lawyers, will desperately work for peanuts. Both are dispensable at the moment. Sorry if it's not what you want to hear.

I'm known as a pessimist on these boards, but you are being downright stupid.

1) If it were up to those in the legal community, all admissions would be frozen? Really? Tell that to the Vault firms that are ramping up hiring this year. Tell that to the firms that are concerned that they may have cut too fast a few years ago, and are now being burned by a lack of mid-level associates, and are slowly starting to increase hiring again. Sure, there is a huge glut of lawyers, but the demand certainly isn't zero.
2) To suggest that going to HYS for free is a bad decision is just stupid. There are plenty of law schools in this country worth going to at the right price, and certainly for free.
3) Stop acting like you possess some sort of higher knowledge that the rest of us don't already know. There are people on TLS who know the market far, far better than even those who are out in practice. Most people on here were well-informed about all of this going in. You're not some prophet sent on high to set us all straight. You're just an asshole.

Don't get me wrong, I love me some healthy pessimism. I think TLS could actually use a lot more of it, as the community as a whole is probably too "rah rah!" about law school for my own taste. But your posts here are just beyond absurd. The reality of legal hiring is bad enough without your hyperbole, so either come back down from your perch and get back in touch with reality, or GTFO of here.

User avatar
LAWSCHOOLREALITY
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2011 4:00 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby LAWSCHOOLREALITY » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:57 pm

romothesavior wrote:
LAWSCHOOLREALITY wrote:Wrong. I never said don't go to law school. I said don't go to law school right now, or within the next few years. If it was up to those in the legal community, we would put at least a two year admissions freeze on all law schools. There simply isn't a need for more lawyers at the moment. Obviously we can't do that so we're just waiting for you to waste three of years of life and thousands of dollars to then curb the glut of lawyers with extremely slim hiring opportunities. Just remember, and I hate to say this, once you leave the classroom and are done competing with your classmates, you have several hundred thousand other lawyers looking for employment to compete with. Plus side to new grads, young and easy to mold. Plus side for unemployed recent grads/older lawyers, will desperately work for peanuts. Both are dispensable at the moment. Sorry if it's not what you want to hear.

I'm known as a pessimist on these boards, but you are being downright stupid.

1) If it were up to those in the legal community, all admissions would be frozen? Really? Tell that to the Vault firms that are ramping up hiring this year. Tell that to the firms that are concerned that they may have cut too fast a few years ago, and are now being burned by a lack of mid-level associates, and are slowly starting to increase hiring again. Sure, there is a huge glut of lawyers, but the demand certainly isn't zero.
2) To suggest that going to HYS for free is a bad decision is just stupid. There are plenty of law schools in this country worth going to at the right price, and certainly for free.
3) Stop acting like you possess some sort of higher knowledge that the rest of us don't already know. There are people on TLS who know the market far, far better than even those who are out in practice. Most people on here were well-informed about all of this going in. You're not some prophet sent on high to set us all straight. You're just an asshole.

Don't get me wrong, I love me some healthy pessimism. I think TLS could actually use a lot more of it, as the community as a whole is probably too "rah rah!" about law school for my own taste. But your posts here are just beyond absurd. The reality of legal hiring is bad enough without your hyperbole, so either come back down from your perch and get back in touch with reality, or GTFO of here.


Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance. Free ride or HYS acceptance.

cattleprod
Posts: 86
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2011 3:18 am

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby cattleprod » Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:58 pm

Richie Tenenbaum wrote:Sorry but you're wrong--there still is a need for legal hiring just because of how biglaw hiring works. Those past graduates who unemployed are pretty much shut out of biglaw. Why? Biglaw simply moves on to the new grads. Would it be better for the profession if it didn't work this way? Maybe, but all I'm focused on is how it currently works. 2Ls are competing against other 2Ls (and a few 3Ls) for future biglaw jobs right now...not the previous grads who are unemployed.


WSJ: First-Year Associates: Are They Worth It?
(October 17, 2011)
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2011/10/17/fir ... -worth-it/

We are trying to enter a market that is changing. Companies don't want to pay first or second year associates.
The billing strategy of Biglaw is falling apart. As a result the law school students of today are getting squeezed out through no fault of their own.
The trend this forces on Biglaw is smaller 1st year associate classes and keeping senior associates longer.
More experienced associates and less fresh meat from T14. More outsourcing of basic legal work.
Just my opinion, you are welcome to it.

User avatar
thelawyler
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: Warning to all 0L's

Postby thelawyler » Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:02 pm

Come on guys, his name is LAWSCHOOLREALITY. It's reality, boys and girls. We should wake up from our fantasies.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 10 guests