Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=273830
Exactly. JDM keeps arguing that a TTTT law degree can give someone a potential path to a middle class life. Which is true. But there are a multitude of other paths to the middle class, and most of them are less expensive and risky than a TTTT JD.HuntedUnicorn wrote: It's not like the world divides into law or blue collar drudgery and unemployment.
How do you explain the "After the JD" study shows 8.7% employed as solos. I can easily explain how the Aba gets it very misleading number - a bunch of retired lawyers not quite ready to hang up their status say they are self employed when in reality they are retired. 8.7% of all graduates from the 2000 (who were admitted to the bar) class were solos in 2012-2013. That matches my experience in practice as well (and is damn near to the dot of what I estimated earlier).Paul Campos wrote:Per the most recent ABA statistics, 49% of all lawyers in private practice are solos, and 75% of lawyers are in private practice.
A lot of solos aren't really managing to make an economic go of it as lawyers, which is why the mean income for the cohort is so low (Of course the median is going to be lower). If you exclude all the people who are trying to make a living in private practice and not managing it, that certainly will help pump the income stats for lawyers.
My experience of a very large sample size of lawyers. I'm also more up to date on actual data than anyone here. I don't really read the lst reports anymore, but I've seen them in worse economies and generally would be able to get close to the breakdown of employment for any level of school probably. Followed the after the JD study which is actually the best data on this subject as it goes a decade and more into the future capturing various snapshots along the way. Read the reports (20-30 hours) and actually browsed the data for probably close to 100 hours last summer.bk1 wrote:Re anecdote of "all I see from my TTT is success as far as the eye can see": successful people (for a variety of reasons) are likely to surround themselves with/be surrounded by other successful people.
The definition is a solo attorney. One attorney. With no employees. That's what a solo is. 8.7% of the class of 2000 bar exam passers are solos.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I mean, if you want to define solo so it doesn't mean what doesn't fit your argument, sure. Just do limit the time and use a self-selected group. My experience includes a much higher percentage of solos.
Sad this got lost among the nonsense, because it's like the best analogy I've seen on retaking.HuntedUnicorn wrote:Think of it this way:
The LSAT is like running a mile
A law exam is like running the 100m in the (special) olympics
It's true that if you had good enough data you could find an average mile time for the general population and that time would probably suck and you could probably also show that most people run about the same time each time they run a mile. But it would be an absolute fallacy to conclude that therefore it wasn't worth the effort to train for the mile because you probably couldn't improve.
On the other hand, you only get one shot at a race and you don't really know how you'll do until it's over. Sure you can train hard for it, but everyone else in your heat also trained hard for it.
So what's the key to winning a medal? Sign up for a race where everyone wins. And that's what going to a top law school does for you.
Problem is once you've got a worthless undergrad you've boxed yourself in. I'd say a coding boot camp class would definitely be better than law. But as far as other jobs, not much is gonna slot you into to earn 6 figures later in life for someone with no connections that comes from a middle class background. Nursing maybe. I don't think law is that great so you won't get much push back from me if people said law sucks these careers are better. I just take issue with the if you go to John Marshall you won't even be a lawyer in 10 years when the data shows that someone who performs badly at John Marshall will on average earn 85-95k in 10 years as a LAWYER in some capacity.TheSpanishMain wrote:Exactly. JDM keeps arguing that a TTTT law degree can give someone a potential path to a middle class life. Which is true. But there are a multitude of other paths to the middle class, and most of them are less expensive and risky than a TTTT JD.HuntedUnicorn wrote: It's not like the world divides into law or blue collar drudgery and unemployment.
How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
Even if you interpreted your results correctly (which you didn't), it only means you were statistically closer to the ENTIRE POPULATION MEAN, not the (expected/supposed/hypothetical) mean outcome for TLS users.Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
How many times can we explain to him how these statistics work?lymenheimer wrote:Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
(Still literally doesn't understand how numbers work including statistics (which are a vast compilation of "tons of anecdotal evidence", btw))
I literally don't think they will ever understand how statistics work.jjcorvino wrote:How many times can we explain to him how these statistics work?lymenheimer wrote:Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
(Still literally doesn't understand how numbers work including statistics (which are a vast compilation of "tons of anecdotal evidence", btw))
The data most definitely does not show that. I know you've been leaning hard on the After the JD data but there's tons of problems with that:JohannDeMann wrote:Problem is once you've got a worthless undergrad you've boxed yourself in. I'd say a coding boot camp class would definitely be better than law. But as far as other jobs, not much is gonna slot you into to earn 6 figures later in life for someone with no connections that comes from a middle class background. Nursing maybe. I don't think law is that great so you won't get much push back from me if people said law sucks these careers are better. I just take issue with the if you go to John Marshall you won't even be a lawyer in 10 years when the data shows that someone who performs badly at John Marshall will on average earn 85-95k in 10 years as a LAWYER in some capacity.TheSpanishMain wrote:Exactly. JDM keeps arguing that a TTTT law degree can give someone a potential path to a middle class life. Which is true. But there are a multitude of other paths to the middle class, and most of them are less expensive and risky than a TTTT JD.HuntedUnicorn wrote: It's not like the world divides into law or blue collar drudgery and unemployment.
I was referring to the mean increases for retakes,not the mean score.mrgstephe wrote:Even if you interpreted your results correctly (which you didn't), it only means you were statistically closer to the ENTIRE POPULATION MEAN, not the (expected/supposed/hypothetical) mean outcome for TLS users.Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
Just because you're OK with being perfectly, patently average doesn't mean the rest of us should give advice to other people to stay 'average'.
Oh, fuck right off with that. Fuck right the hell off.JohannDeMann wrote:The point is you actually suck at analyzing risk because you're so risk averse that you just don't do risky things whereas people who do analyze risk because everything they've done is a risk because they've never had anything handed to them understand risk analysis.
LOL!Ferrisjso wrote:Do you people understand sample size?
180HuntedUnicorn wrote:LOL!Ferrisjso wrote:Do you people understand sample size?
If that's what you were referring to, then again you were misinterpreting the data. The mean increase for second timers is something like 2.6 points, and the mean increase for third timers is something like 2.2 points on top of that.Ferrisjso wrote:I was referring to the mean increases for retakes,not the mean score.mrgstephe wrote:Even if you interpreted your results correctly (which you didn't), it only means you were statistically closer to the ENTIRE POPULATION MEAN, not the (expected/supposed/hypothetical) mean outcome for TLS users.Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
Just because you're OK with being perfectly, patently average doesn't mean the rest of us should give advice to other people to stay 'average'.
Eh, I think this is a valid point. I think a lot of people (especially KJDs, or 1-2 years WE) who were able to graduate from undergrad with zero debt tend to be a lot more risk averse simply because they know how nice it is to not deal with FAFSA/loans, etc. and don't want to ever have to. Then again, if you're already 50k in debt from undergrad, or you know what it's like to be literally dirt poor, you're probably going to be more risk averse because you don't want to add another 250k to your debt load. It's definitely a case by case basis though. Personally, I am incredibly privileged and grateful to have zero undergrad debt, so the appeal of never having to pay back a single student loan is veryyyyyy high, which makes me very debt averse.JohannDeMann wrote:The point is you actually suck at analyzing risk because you're so risk averse that you just don't do risky things whereas people who do analyze risk because everything they've done is a risk because they've never had anything handed to them understand risk analysis.
I thought we'd already proven that wrong yesterday?mrgstephe wrote:If that's what you were referring to, then again you were misinterpreting the data. The mean increase for second timers is something like 2.6 points, and the mean increase for third timers is something like 2.2 points on top of that.Ferrisjso wrote:I was referring to the mean increases for retakes,not the mean score.mrgstephe wrote:Even if you interpreted your results correctly (which you didn't), it only means you were statistically closer to the ENTIRE POPULATION MEAN, not the (expected/supposed/hypothetical) mean outcome for TLS users.Ferrisjso wrote:How is that different than people who get massive score increases off of retakes telling people that waiting a year is a good idea? Statistically my outcome is closer to the mean(slight improvement second time,decline third time). Again never encouraged people not to retake if they didnt have to take a year off(and if i did they were in great situations where they shouldnt have had to retake), also if youre upset with me giving that advice ,im mostly going to stop( at least woth those who havent applied) because at this point even without a retake a better outcome next year is basically ensured nm with one. Think taking a year off is a considerable burden to many people and statistically it probably wont pay off. The tons of anecdotal evidence on here is misleading. If one is confident they havent done their best they should wait (in general not this year) but not because theyre convinced by others that waiting a year is worth it to roll the dice again.A. Nony Mouse wrote:I am actually fine with ferrisjo doing that. I just don't think he should extrapolate from his own experience to everyone on this site.
Just because you're OK with being perfectly, patently average doesn't mean the rest of us should give advice to other people to stay 'average'.
What you were referencing was the overall mean score distribution for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd time takers.
Where is the "too far" in this?Ferrisjso wrote:I am risk adverse all of you are just extremists. Lots of 0L's look at me pretty similar to the way I look at you, debt at high interest rates with low employment options is a problem and a lot of people are super naive about it but again you guys take it WAY to far.