ipguy wrote:Big Shrimpin wrote:Astute analysis there, lil brah. Try again when you have actually have something to say.
I'll slow this down for you "broski" Perhaps your poor reading comprehension and communication skills are why your bonus is flat.
1. You claimed salaries would never reach $190k.Big Shrimpin wrote:"never."
2. I replied that saying salaries would never reach $190k made zero sense.
3. You articulated the reasons you felt I was incorrect in this well thought out, insightful, and well supported response:Big Shrimpin wrote:You seem dumb.
4. I pointed out that you may need a lesson in entry level econ, as implying that salaries would never reach $190k was about as intelligent as saying the sun will never burn out.
Which brings us back to your current reply. Why don't you try again when you have something of even entry level intelligence to add.
It appears that your I-am-the-gunner-you-hated-in-law-school list of facts excludes the following post:
Big Shrimpin wrote: Actually, 2nd year biglaw assoc. The business model has changed, partners are more greedy and clients have become much tighter on budgets and tend to micromanage. I don't have time to argue because I have been writing briefs all week, but the cash flow from clients isn't the unattended faucet it used to be. In house counsel scrutinizes bills, doesn't approve strategy lines, etc. And where revenues are creeping up, partners are grabbing more of the take. Throw on top of that discovery solutions services and case management outsourcing, the industry is moving, if in any direction, away from tossing extra coin to increased salaries for associates. Fuck, I mean much of the rapid increase in the mid-2000s was a big game of keeping up with the joneses. And the firms that have raised salaries are boutiques that provide special services or premium talent. Moreover, Lots of the grunt work 1-3rd years do can be farmed out to drones in a factory in WV or some other state where people are named "Bubba" making 80k/yr.
But I think BigShrimpin called you dumb because you went on a tiny rant about the accuracy of his clearly sarcastic remark. I tend to agree with him.