Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby manofjustice » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:56 am

dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote: the term "rent-seeking" is put in quotations for a reason, but functionally, it's a proper application, if an unorthodox one.

no, it isn't. Every time I see the incorrect usage it makes me cringe. Do not use well-established technical or academic terms incorrectly. Saying it's a proper application doesn't make it so. It's not unorthodox, it's wrong.


You're just being uncreative. And if I recall correctly, I believe I put the sword through the heart of your opposition to my argument by equating it with the "charge what the market can bear" principle. Now, Dean Mitchell used the same words. But since the market can bear both a higher cost (propelled by students seeking a lifetime of increased earnings) and a lower cost (propelled by out-of-work former associates seeking jobs as law professors), your principle is inferior to mine, which yields a singular market price: the fair value for the services that comprise the education.....

....but enough of that...(probably not)

What if I agree to use a different term? Will you agree to entitlement spending cuts?

:?: big jargon =/= big idea, but feel free to keep using terms you don't really understand and spouting off things that don't make sense (the market can bear both a higher cost and a lower cost - say what?)


"Charge what the market can bear" implies one party getting as much from the other party as that other party will allow.

If law students do the above, the market bears a lower cost. If law professors do the above, the market bears a higher cost. When Dean Mitchell simply says "we will of course charge what the market will bear," implying that doing so yields a) the efficient market price for his education, and also implying b) that the efficient market price for his education is the right price, I, while admitting b), reject a).

a) Why would we suppose that "charging what the market will bear" yields the efficient market price for his education ONLY WHEN the law professors "charge what the market will bear?" b) Further, even if we were to admit that charging what the market will bear only when the law professors do so yields the efficient market price, why would we suppose that such a price so charged is the right price?

Because both students and law professors can "charge what the market will bear," that principle yields two prices--either two efficient prices and at least two "right" prices.

Normally, both sides tug at the same time--both sides "charge what the other will bear." But as a factual matter, because we can easily envision law schools charging merely as much as they did 10 years ago--quite a bit less in real dollars--and surviving financially--we detect a market failure. The market failure is explained above as "rent-seeking active investment profit."
Last edited by manofjustice on Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dingbat » Mon Jan 07, 2013 10:59 am

^please stop talking^

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby manofjustice » Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:03 am

dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition. Better look around you...notice where you are.

You are conventionally assumed to be grossly wrong in your beliefs, and your counterarguments to mine have amounted to "naw awww."

So, you're welcome to start talking--relevantly--if you wish. But I'll keep on encouraging law school professors to tone down the tuition hikes. If you don't mind. You're welcome.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby stillwater » Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:04 am

manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition. Better look around you...notice where you are.

You are conventionally assumed to be grossly wrong in your beliefs, and your counterarguments to mine have amounted to "naw awww."

So, you're welcome to start talking--relevantly--if you wish. But I'll keep on encouraging law school professors to tone down the tuition hikes. If you don't mind. You're welcome.


Is DingBat a ... shitboomer?

rad lulz
Posts: 9844
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby rad lulz » Mon Jan 07, 2013 11:36 am

stillwater wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition. Better look around you...notice where you are.

You are conventionally assumed to be grossly wrong in your beliefs, and your counterarguments to mine have amounted to "naw awww."

So, you're welcome to start talking--relevantly--if you wish. But I'll keep on encouraging law school professors to tone down the tuition hikes. If you don't mind. You're welcome.


Is DingBat a ... shitboomer?

Asked and answered bro

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dingbat » Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:09 pm

manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition.

I'm not on the dean's side, I'm calling you out for misusing jargon that you don't understand.
Just because I think you're an idiot doesn't mean I'm taking the side of whoever you're opposing

I'm not countering your argument, I'm telling you to make your argument, not just throw out big words and misapply them.

User avatar
suralin
better than you
Posts: 15059
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:52 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby suralin » Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:15 pm

dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition.

I'm not on the dean's side, I'm calling you out for misusing jargon that you don't understand.
Just because I think you're an idiot doesn't mean I'm taking the side of whoever you're opposing

I'm not countering your argument, I'm telling you to make your argument, not just throw out big words and misapply them.


If you don't agree with me, you're a Commie.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dingbat » Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:20 pm

Suralin wrote:
dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition.

I'm not on the dean's side, I'm calling you out for misusing jargon that you don't understand.
Just because I think you're an idiot doesn't mean I'm taking the side of whoever you're opposing

I'm not countering your argument, I'm telling you to make your argument, not just throw out big words and misapply them.


If you don't agree with me, you're a Commie.

Better red than dead, right?

User avatar
suralin
better than you
Posts: 15059
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2012 1:52 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby suralin » Mon Jan 07, 2013 12:22 pm

dingbat wrote:
Suralin wrote:
dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition.

I'm not on the dean's side, I'm calling you out for misusing jargon that you don't understand.
Just because I think you're an idiot doesn't mean I'm taking the side of whoever you're opposing

I'm not countering your argument, I'm telling you to make your argument, not just throw out big words and misapply them.


If you don't agree with me, you're a Commie.

Better red than dead, right?


Of course :P

User avatar
Elston Gunn
Posts: 3444
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2011 4:09 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby Elston Gunn » Mon Jan 07, 2013 2:04 pm

manofjustice wrote:
First, we don't even know if that's true. Dean Mitchell claimed he's spending from his endowment--but we don't know if from interest or principal. Second, we don't know where the money goes. Third, we don't know how much he could spend. Dean Mitchell just says he has to keep the lights on, which, while a correct statement, should be stricken from the record as irrelevant and much too flippant. Forth, there is really only one thing that raises the prestige of a school--the attractiveness of the school's graduates to employers. And that is more than a little related to the prestige of the school's incoming class.

Hence, drop class sizes and maintain medians.

To emulate a famous political consultant, we should repeat over and over again to law school faculty: "it's about the dropping LSAT test-takers, stupid."


I was talking about HYS. And yeah, we do know that info.

I'm not really defending the schools, I'm just saying they've chosen to give big scholarships in the form of smaller class sizes and clinics and fancy libraries and stuff instead of cheaper tuition.

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby manofjustice » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:00 pm

dingbat wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
dingbat wrote:^please stop talking^


Hey, DigBat, you're siding with Dean Mitchell on the price of tuition.

I'm not on the dean's side, I'm calling you out for misusing jargon that you don't understand.
Just because I think you're an idiot doesn't mean I'm taking the side of whoever you're opposing

I'm not countering your argument, I'm telling you to make your argument, not just throw out big words and misapply them.


Dingbat, try rereading the voluminous verbiage I have posted. Therein you'll find my argument. Every time you see the words "rent-seeking," read "blue rhino." I have so throughout explained my argument, that the term "rent-seeking" is a mere placeholder for a developed concept to which you can ascribe any name. Stop embarrassing yourself.

User avatar
stillwater
Posts: 3811
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:59 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby stillwater » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:03 pm

will justice be meted out today?

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dingbat » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:04 pm

manofjustice wrote:Stop embarrassing yourself.

you should try this yourself

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3142
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:39 pm

I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby spleenworship » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:43 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.

ShitLawOrBust
Posts: 102
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 9:17 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby ShitLawOrBust » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:45 pm

spleenworship wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.


argumentum ad hominem

timbs4339
Posts: 2733
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby timbs4339 » Mon Jan 07, 2013 5:49 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.


+1

User avatar
Tanicius
Posts: 2957
Joined: Sat Feb 07, 2009 12:54 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby Tanicius » Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:14 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
spleenworship wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.


argumentum ad hominem


That's only a fallacy when the order of logic goes from "X is a tool bag" ---> "Therefore X's point is wrong." It's perfectly sound reasoning when it goes the other direction: "X's point is wrong" ---> "Therefore X is a tool."

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby spleenworship » Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:15 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
spleenworship wrote:
dixiecupdrinking wrote:I fear this discussion has obfuscated the central point here, which is Dean Mitchell is a toolbag.


argumentum ad hominem



What the hell is with the abuse of the damn anon button in this thread?

I'm on the verge of reporting all of them. If you got something to say, just say it. Being anon doesn't make this any more funny. Or make your accusation make sense.

User avatar
vanwinkle
Posts: 9740
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 3:02 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby vanwinkle » Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:28 pm

spleenworship wrote:What the hell is with the abuse of the damn anon button in this thread?

I got this. Ahem:

Warning to all posters: Don't use anon for general opinion-giving or nitpicking other posters. You may and probably will be outed if you do so. You have been warned.

WanderingPondering
Posts: 444
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2012 10:47 am

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby WanderingPondering » Mon Jan 07, 2013 6:58 pm

Just got an email from Dean Mitchell and his school.

Case Western Reserve School of Law is holding a series of webinars for prospective law students focused on legal education generally and opportunities at Case Western specifically. The first of these will feature School of Law Dean Lawrence Mitchell discussing "Law School in an Age of Anxiety" on Wednesday, January 9, 2013 from 4:30pm - 5:00pm EST.

Dean Mitchell will talk about the issues facing legal education, address the economic condition of the legal market, and answer questions from participants. His remarks will also highlight the features that make Case Western Reserve's programs and location unique. Webcast viewers are encouraged to submit questions for the Dean now and during the broadcast via email at lawadmissions@case.edu with the subject line: Dean's Webcast.

The Dean is a frequent contributor to discussions on law, legal education, and life through his blog, View from the Circle. He's been published in the New York Times and interviewed by Bloomberg in recent weeks making the case for the value of legal education. He acknowledges the challenge of current market conditions but still strongly believes that legal education provides superior lifetime value.

The webcast is open to all prospective law students. To join the conversation on Wednesday, please click here for the link.

User avatar
spleenworship
Posts: 4421
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2011 11:08 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby spleenworship » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:12 pm

WanderingPondering wrote:Just got an email from Dean Mitchell and his school.

Case Western Reserve School of Law is holding a series of webinars for prospective law students focused on legal education generally and opportunities at Case Western specifically. The first of these will feature School of Law Dean Lawrence Mitchell discussing "Law School in an Age of Anxiety" on Wednesday, January 9, 2013 from 4:30pm - 5:00pm EST.

Dean Mitchell will talk about the issues facing legal education, address the economic condition of the legal market, and answer questions from participants. His remarks will also highlight the features that make Case Western Reserve's programs and location unique. Webcast viewers are encouraged to submit questions for the Dean now and during the broadcast via email at lawadmissions@case.edu with the subject line: Dean's Webcast.

The Dean is a frequent contributor to discussions on law, legal education, and life through his blog, View from the Circle. He's been published in the New York Times and interviewed by Bloomberg in recent weeks making the case for the value of legal education. He acknowledges the challenge of current market conditions but still strongly believes that legal education provides superior lifetime value.

The webcast is open to all prospective law students. To join the conversation on Wednesday, please click here for the link.


Kinda wishing I was a 0L right now.

User avatar
manofjustice
Posts: 1323
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 10:01 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby manofjustice » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:38 pm

Elston Gunn wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
First, we don't even know if that's true. Dean Mitchell claimed he's spending from his endowment--but we don't know if from interest or principal. Second, we don't know where the money goes. Third, we don't know how much he could spend. Dean Mitchell just says he has to keep the lights on, which, while a correct statement, should be stricken from the record as irrelevant and much too flippant. Forth, there is really only one thing that raises the prestige of a school--the attractiveness of the school's graduates to employers. And that is more than a little related to the prestige of the school's incoming class.

Hence, drop class sizes and maintain medians.

To emulate a famous political consultant, we should repeat over and over again to law school faculty: "it's about the dropping LSAT test-takers, stupid."


I was talking about HYS. And yeah, we do know that info.

I'm not really defending the schools, I'm just saying they've chosen to give big scholarships in the form of smaller class sizes and clinics and fancy libraries and stuff instead of cheaper tuition.


To emphasize my second point, I think those are incredibly glib suppositions, dangerous when trying to positively contribute to the debate over the crisis in the legal profession. Fancy libraries and stuff? Clinics? Smaller class sizes? These are not out-of-line points to bring up, but a) pull back a bit. Do law schools spend money wisely? If they pay just 20% more than they should on everything they buy, tuition is at least 20% higher. Is there a wide variety of spending efficiency among business, managed by people who actually know business? Yes. Some businesses spend very well, others spend themselves into bankruptcy. Would the legal academy demean themselves so much as to hire a business manager to cut costs? Probably not. They'd probably spend too much and stick their heads up their asses and tell themselves "hey, managing a business ain't so hard."

b) who the hell told law professors they could teach smaller classes? I sympathize with law professors. I really do: all the exams of 80 students at a top law school probably totals at least 800 pages, single spaced. That's a lot of work--but just twice a year. I would surmise that the overwhelming impetus to lower class sizes (and thereby dramatically increase costs) is professor comfort, not student-advantage. In support, Professor Campos notes that class sizes at top schools have dramatically increased as recently as within the past decade.

I am sure most present prospective students would willingly trade the oh-so woefully substandard education at Harvard Law of 10 years ago for substantially lower tuition at the same institution today.

User avatar
dingbat
Posts: 4976
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 9:12 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby dingbat » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:48 pm

manofjustice wrote:
Elston Gunn wrote:
manofjustice wrote:
First, we don't even know if that's true. Dean Mitchell claimed he's spending from his endowment--but we don't know if from interest or principal. Second, we don't know where the money goes. Third, we don't know how much he could spend. Dean Mitchell just says he has to keep the lights on, which, while a correct statement, should be stricken from the record as irrelevant and much too flippant. Forth, there is really only one thing that raises the prestige of a school--the attractiveness of the school's graduates to employers. And that is more than a little related to the prestige of the school's incoming class.

Hence, drop class sizes and maintain medians.

To emulate a famous political consultant, we should repeat over and over again to law school faculty: "it's about the dropping LSAT test-takers, stupid."


I was talking about HYS. And yeah, we do know that info.

I'm not really defending the schools, I'm just saying they've chosen to give big scholarships in the form of smaller class sizes and clinics and fancy libraries and stuff instead of cheaper tuition.


To emphasize my second point, I think those are incredibly glib suppositions, dangerous when trying to positively contribute to the debate over the crisis in the legal profession. Fancy libraries and stuff? Clinics? Smaller class sizes? These are not out-of-line points to bring up, but a) pull back a bit. Do law schools spend money wisely? If they pay just 20% more than they should on everything they buy, tuition is at least 20% higher. Is there a wide variety of spending efficiency among business, managed by people who actually know business? Yes. Some businesses spend very well, others spend themselves into bankruptcy. Would the legal academy demean themselves so much as to hire a business manager to cut costs? Probably not. They'd probably spend too much and stick their heads up their asses and tell themselves "hey, managing a business ain't so hard."

b) who the hell told law professors they could teach smaller classes? I sympathize with law professors. I really do: all the exams of 80 students at a top law school probably totals at least 800 pages, single spaced. That's a lot of work--but just twice a year. I would surmise that the overwhelming impetus to lower class sizes (and thereby dramatically increase costs) is professor comfort, not student-advantage. In support, Professor Campos notes that class sizes at top schools have dramatically increased as recently as within the past decade. I am sure most present prospective students would willingly trade the oh-so woefully substandard education at Harvard Law of 10 years ago for substantially lower tuition at the same institution today.

OK, let's leave libraries out of this, as A) they really are essential, and B) the cost is relatively low
Now, you make 2 bad assumptions:
1) you assume that schools don't hire a business manager, or at the very least, don't have people with business sense in decision making capacity. This is probably wrong, though let's not get into a pissing contest. I'ts just a bad assumption.
2) if a school pays 20% too much on everything they buy, tuition will be at least 20% more. This isn't necessarily true because salaries are the big budget items for a law school. I will be kind and assume you've included professors, in which case your statement is correct.

However, it's not simply a matter of saying a school is paying its professors too much. There are too many factors to take into consideration and it's a bad statement. I could go on, but it's effectively the same reasons why professional athletes and movie stars make ridiculous amounts of money. But let's not digress.

As for class size, I hate large classes and I'm damn glad I don't have class with 100+ people. I don't think it's an efficient way to learn. The best academic experiences I've ever had were in classes of 10-20 students.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Dean Mitchell's Response to Criticism

Postby beachbum » Mon Jan 07, 2013 7:52 pm

Law students are the worst.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.