I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe that someone who claims to come from such a background would side with the whiny brats complaining about making 160k a year. Maybe I just have kept true to my roots unlike her but I count my blessings that I have the opportunities currently afforded to me by my law school education.
Working long hours in an air conditioned office reading and writing (even if they are mundane and boring) is alot sweeter than 99.999% of other jobs in the world. Sure it would be cooler to be a big time pro athlete, movie actor, or heir to the British crown. But instead of pitying my life by comparing myself to the few people on the planet who make more while working less, I just count my blessings that I'm doing better than 99.9% of humanity.
Thats the perspective that coming from a humble background brings. Unlike the spoiled brat perspective that runs rampant among biglaw associates who believe they are owed a 6 figure salary.
You had two avenues with 4 possible results
1) Taking her word for it, and it's false-which wouldn't matter.
2) Taking her word for it, and it's true--good for you for believing her.
3) Not taking her word for it and looking like a total douche
4) Not taking her word for it and being right on the interwebs.
Congratulations, you're in world 3.
In addition, you misunderstand her argument completely, as well as the argument of many others in this thread, leading you to summarize her as a whiny brat.
She is not complaining about making 160K a year.
It's true that it's unreasonable to expect to earn a lot of money without having to put in the time. I don't think biglaw hours are outrageous when one considers the compensation. I think it's outrageous, and unfortunate, that some people have to work those hours without similar compensation.
The argument that others are putting forth is that one doesn't NEED a 6 figure salary, and that in terms of one's overall happiness, one would probably be happier with less money, but more personal time. This is hard to find--very few jobs hit that sweet spot. But it's not "whiny" to point out that biglaw has drawbacks, especially if one is in a position where one could find a job that fits them better. As DG puts it:
dailygrind wrote:Call me crazy, but I think it's possible to be grateful that you have an opportunity and still complain about some aspects of it.
Life is full of tradeoffs. It's not unreasonable to point out the drawbacks to something, even if has got good benefits.
You're arguing against a straw man argument of "oh poor me, I make 160K and I have to work for it" that nobody is asserting.