The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
sfhaze
Posts: 107
Joined: Sat Mar 02, 2013 5:04 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby sfhaze » Sat Apr 06, 2013 11:39 pm

canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

:lol:. You're on the right path there too. Lots of converging paths in this thread...

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:18 am

Tom Joad wrote:OP's post history is gold.


One day I will be cool like you and have almost 15k posts. Oh wait, no. I won't.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:19 am

hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.


Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:21 am

canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.

User avatar
Bildungsroman
Posts: 5548
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Bildungsroman » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:24 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.


Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.

You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 12:33 am

Bildungsroman wrote:
Ben Franklin wrote:
hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.


Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.

You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.


I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22892
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:08 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.

I do not think that means what you think it means.

User avatar
RELIC
Posts: 216
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2013 11:00 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby RELIC » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:20 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
Bildungsroman wrote:
Ben Franklin wrote:
hibiki wrote:Someone did poorly on the LSAT.


Haven't taken it yet. Taking in June or October. Haven't really decided.

You're a bad troll. It's not believable that a 0L would be this self-righteous and stupid. Sorry, blew your wad too early.


I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.

The Ben Franklin username and picture was too obvious bro. Better luck next Troll.

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

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby prezidentv8 » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:21 am

Image

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Tom Joad » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:32 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:OP's post history is gold.


One day I will be cool like you and have almost 15k posts. Oh wait, no. I won't.

Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:12 am

Tom Joad wrote:Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.


How about your illiteracy?

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:13 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
Ben Franklin wrote:
canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.

I do not think that means what you think it means.


It means exactly what I think it means. Empirical - Adjective - Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Who's next?

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Tom Joad » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:14 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:Surprisingly, I think this is the the first time somebody has directly insulted me for my poast count.


How about your illiteracy?

GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:16 am

RELIC wrote:The Ben Franklin username and picture was too obvious bro. Better luck next Troll.


Too obvious? Someone has to be in law school to know who Ben Franklin was?

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:19 am

Tom Joad wrote:GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.


Is that supposed to offend me somehow? It is worth noting that Ben Franklin made more contributions to society than many of the early presidents combined. Only a dumbass would undercut Ben Franklin for not being elected president. But we shouldn't get off topic here.

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Tom Joad » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:28 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:GTFO with your 18th century lexicon, Ben Franklin dumbass who couldn't even be POTUS.


Is that supposed to offend me somehow? It is worth noting that Ben Franklin made more contributions to society than many of the early presidents combined. Only a dumbass would undercut Ben Franklin for not being elected president. But we shouldn't get off topic here.

Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.

User avatar
Ben Franklin
Posts: 85
Joined: Mon Apr 01, 2013 3:45 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Ben Franklin » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:38 am

Tom Joad wrote:Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.


And I suppose Bobby Hill is a far better role model? I tell you hwhut.

User avatar
Tom Joad
Posts: 4542
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Tom Joad » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:42 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:Benji Franklin is old, fat, and would wake up in the middle of the night and read in the nude. You think that is a healthy life? You make me sick.


And I suppose Bobby Hill is a far better role model? I tell you hwhut.

You really think you are something else, don't you, asshole? If you are ever in my hood, let me know if you want to throw fisticuffs, because I would be game.

User avatar
Merylian
Posts: 659
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2012 9:46 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Merylian » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:54 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
I've lurked TLS for the better part of 3 years. Finally said enough is enough, after seeing so many pretentious assholes chopping people down. I have a family reunion planned for the week of June 10th, out of state, and have not yet decided if I'm cancelling that for the LSAT. Especially when I can take it in October and not miss out on the upcoming cycle.


I think it's slightly hypocritical to make cutting remarks about people with high post counts and then turn around to use your 3 years of lurking on the same website as justification for making a thread like this. Is making 15,000 posts worse than reading 300,000 of them?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse
Posts: 22892
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby A. Nony Mouse » Sun Apr 07, 2013 3:59 am

Ben Franklin wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
Ben Franklin wrote:
canarykb wrote:What a fucking obnoxious OP, seriously.

I am admittedly obnoxious, but nonetheless entitled to an opinion based on my empirical research.

I do not think that means what you think it means.


It means exactly what I think it means. Empirical - Adjective - Based on, concerned with, or verifiable by observation or experience rather than theory or pure logic. Who's next?

Sitting in a law firm as a non-lawyer and reading a crapload of TLS posts doesn't count.

WhatOurBodiesAreFor
Posts: 369
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 9:23 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby WhatOurBodiesAreFor » Sun Apr 07, 2013 5:02 am

Ben Franklin wrote:Here is my theory on why there is a high amount of unemployment amongst law grads. We all know that there are not enough jobs out there to support the amount of students graduating every year. This is 50% the fault of law schools, but also 50% the fault of the applicants.

I theorize that roughly 40-50% of applicants are of the variety that have no business attending law school in the first place. Just because you may be "smart" and can "do well on a standardized test" does not mean that you can, or should, be an attorney. You are better served being a math major, engineer, or something of that nature. Being an attorney requires a blend of social acumen, street smarts, book smarts, and business sense. Again, JUST BECAUSE YOU CAN DO WELL ON THE LSAT DOES NOT MEAN YOU SHOULD BE APPLYING TO LAW SCHOOL. Unfortunately, law schools will continue to accept and graduate these individuals at a high rate, so long as they have "the numbers".

Yes, there aren't enough jobs to go around, we are all well aware of this fact. But the problem is that too many of you think law is for you, when it isn't. The culture of this country breeds young individuals that carry a grandiose sense of self-perception and entitlement. The result is an influx of kids who think law is for them, because they "were destined to be somebody".

Law might not be for you if:

1. You chose law for lack of something better to do with your life. Having a JD doesn't mean you've made it. Like anything else, it takes years of practice and dedication to be successful. Many young people today do not realize this.

2. You have no friends, rarely get out, and are socially inept. The legal profession, no matter what type of law you choose to practice, requires individuals to have a certain level of social skills. And yes, this includes people that have 10,000+ posts on message boards. This does not, by any stretch of the imagination, make you cool. You might have finally found a way to fit in by becoming a "regular", but many of you are the epitome of the type of person that has no business being an attorney.

3. You think that because you are "smart", that you should be an attorney. I know plenty of attorneys that are dumb as a box of rocks, but are great attorneys.

4. You think that your ability to learn the methods and techniques of a standardized test means that you will be, or should be, an attorney. Again, this is certainly not the case.

5. You think that being a lawyer will make you rich. This sort of ties into reason #1, but has its own number because many people falsely assume that all lawyers make a ton of money. Plenty do, but only those that were dedicated and worked hard. Law is not a get rich quick business.

This rant is mainly directed at those on this forum who discourage people from going to law school, when they themselves should not be going to law school either. I say everyone should follow their dreams, but unless people stop having a blind sense of self-perception, they will keep applying, attending, and graduating in masses. And before some of you on here discourage someone from going to law school, look in the mirror.


I normally love these kinds of posts. But come on, OP, this is awful. You've genuinely failed to make one good point.

Of course there is a good number of people that shouldn't be in law school and a good number of people who genuinely love lawyering and should not struggling for a job. But, plain and simple, that's the nature of the game. You can't attack and blame people like that, as if everyone, if they only thought hard enough, they can figure out exactly what they want in life. If you want to write a real proposal on how to get rid of the oversupply - like one based on more cogent points than "people have an inflated sense of self-worth" - then we'd be all ears. But get this weak stuff out of here, man.

Now, you were approaching cogency when you started bashing TLS (but he wasn't really all that close, guys, chill out!). TLS's definition and the layperson's definition of "fucking scam" are different. TLS thinks that any school you pay 200K for should leave you with virtually a guaranteed job. In general, the everyday guy is much more accepting of the risk. While TLS's trying to steer people away from American or Florida Gulf Coast is so absolutely right, most of TLS have pretty decent opportunity costs and so paying 250K to go to GW, Georgetown, or even UVA could (comparatively) destroy their future. For me, this is the biggest problem of TLS. Most of them have pretty good alternatives and some people (like me) really don't. This means the advice they give to everyday Joe may not be spot on, as the TLS narrative is better shaped for the well-educated with good alternatives to law school.

Anyway, OP, come on. You're making every 0L say "I hope this isn't what people are like/turn into at law school"

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

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Samara » Sun Apr 07, 2013 9:50 am

Your argument is that many people shouldn't go to law school, but that TLS megapoasters shouldn't tell people not to go to law school? Makes sense to me. I would rather take law school advice from a self-righteous douche who hasn't even taken the LSAT than experienced students, professors and lawyers. Next time I get sick, I'll watch a few episodes of House instead of going to the doctor.

User avatar
Aberzombie1892
Posts: 1907
Joined: Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:56 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby Aberzombie1892 » Sun Apr 07, 2013 10:05 am

This thread is hilarious.

EDIT - I will bite.

This issue with law is that the law degree was an entrepreneurial degree for most of history, and should still be considered as such today. Pre-ABA, apprentices would study law under a practicitioner of law who would, once they were satisfied that their apprentice was ready for the bar, write a letter of recommendation for the apprentice so that the apprentice could take the (easy) equivalent of the bar exam. After passing such an exam, the individual would find a location to set up their solo practice. The apprentice would likely never be rich, but they would be able to manage a (generally lower) middle class lifestyle and they would be well respected in the community. Eventually, this evolved into law schools, and apprenticeships were slowly phased out. At this point in time, law school did not require undergraduate school, was extremely cheap (comparatively speaking after adjusting for inflation), and law schools primarily used practioners to teach students. Remember again that most graduates from school were primarily starting their own practices, as there were only a few law firms before 1942.

While many more legal positions have been added since that time (law firms, government position, PI, etc.), there are still not even close to enough positions to allow each graduate to have a job. Of couse, there were never enough positions for all of the graduates. Ever. Not even close. This wouldn't be so much of a problem if (1) law school actually taught you practical skills (I could ask any 3L to perform due diligence on purchasing assets from a business, and they would be like WTF?) and (2) law school was affordable. (1) is the result of the ABA requiring the law schools teach through full time professors (of course, no one with a real firm job/practice has the ability to teach at the same times every week - many students that have had adjunct law professors know this) and (2) is the result of the government subsidizing student loans. (2) is particularly alarming because it allows schools to charge whatever they want. They get away with that by billing law school as a path to employment, when law schools know that most of their classes will either never practice law or will only be legal field for 1-3 years and not really be better off because of it in terms of career or financial resources (why this isn't against the ethical rules, I don't know). Of course, no one would go to law school if it meant that you would eventually have to start your own business, since it requires a least 7 years of college/opportunity cost/tuition/living. As such, law schools do not bill it as that.

User avatar
dextermorgan
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2008 12:37 am

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby dextermorgan » Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:55 am

It is true that most people in law school shouldn't be there. Law school is the dumping ground for 21 year olds with worthless degrees and a fear of the real world. That's not why there aren't enough jobs to go around though. See, a lot of those students will never practice law by choice. They think it's a versatile degree or some shit.

The reason is that the profession has evolved to revere shitboomers who don't retire. We think they are wise elders of a noble profession while they slowly lose their minds and drool at their desks.

User avatar
North
Posts: 4043
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:09 pm

Re: The real reason why there aren't enough jobs to go around

Postby North » Sun Apr 07, 2013 1:27 pm

I wonder which frat OP is in.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Mullens, packerboy31489 and 2 guests