3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Not sure where your numbers will get you? Dying to know where you stand? Come have your palms read by your fellow posters!
xoxo, gossipgirl
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 3:23 am

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby xoxo, gossipgirl » Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:19 pm

thaaankkkksss got my questions answered on a different thread.

xoxo, the special snowflake.
Last edited by xoxo, gossipgirl on Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fltanglab
Posts: 555
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 3:44 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby fltanglab » Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:31 pm

You need to edit your posts before hitting "post." You sound like a train wreck.

Anyway, when posters comment on your school choice being wrong, you should probably actually listen and apply more broadly. Where you end up for school can make or break your job prospects. You also can't be set on one practice area because you're probably going to change your mind and you want to have options. The effort it takes to apply to more schools is worth it to avoid unemployment.

User avatar
unodostres
Posts: 551
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 1:01 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby unodostres » Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:41 pm

calm down first of all.

second, retake.

third, retake.

next.

User avatar
twenty
Posts: 3153
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby twenty » Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:49 pm

On TLS we call it special-snowflake syndrome. What that means is that you have really clear and obvious data in front of you, like the fact that you're far more likely to practice law in NYC coming from Cornell than you are coming from Fordham, but are still determined to make potentially life-ruining decisions based on personal wants.

I don't think you fully understand how much debt 200k is. From most of these schools you're looking at, you have between an 5% chance and a 35% chance of getting a job where you could reasonably expect to pay that kind of debt back. If you're on PAYE, you'll very likely be spending the next twenty years of your life making up for a bad decision.

For your sake, I sincerely and honestly hope that every sub-par school on your list rejects you so that you can't make a horrible decision. Not being a jerk here -- I wouldn't wish that kind of a life on my worst enemy. Unfortunately for you, I imagine Pepperdine, Western and Chapman at the very least will accept you, for which I am sincerely sorry.

but i have a lot of different things to factor in other than 'will i have a certain kind of job at the end of this'.


If you have other things that are more important than "will I be able to get a job that pays off this debt?" RUN don't walk away from law school.
Last edited by twenty on Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
objection_your_honor
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:19 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby objection_your_honor » Tue Dec 10, 2013 4:49 pm

If your "law school journey" involves getting any legal job, then the posted advice has been extremely relevant.

Cellar-door
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 4:33 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby Cellar-door » Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:02 pm

xoxo, gossipgirl wrote:hey all, i think i should've been clearer. i'm not trying to ignore anyone's advice, but i posted the schools i did not because i'm hoping someone will convince me to add more schools, but because those are the only ones I want. I appreciate everything that's been said on here, but a lot of it doesn't apply to me at all. and i know that that's not the way everyone's law school journey works, but i have a lot of different things to factor in other than 'will i have a certain kind of job at the end of this'. when i posted, i was really hoping for more specific chances in regards to the schools i listed. instead i've gotten a lot of (great, but irrelevant for me) advice on how to go about changing all the things i've decided i want because that fits better into the mold for what a law school applicant needs to want. i guess this may have been the wrong place to look for school specific answers at- does anyone know how i can move this post from the chance me board to school specific boards?

thanks yall! I really do appreciate your answers, but they weren't answers to the questions i asked. (my own fault, i could have been clearer about that.)

:)


There is no situation (other than you will receive a multi-million dollar inheritance upon completing any law school) under which the given advice in this thread isn't the best advice for you.

Regardless of what you want to do with your law degree better schools will give you a better chance of doing it.

The schools you are looking at that you have a chance of attending are in no circumstance worth the money and time required to graduate.

If your goal in going to law school doesn't involve a job where you need a JD then don't go to law school, go get an MBA if you feel the need to waste money on a graduate degree, it's cheaper.

User avatar
Gooner91
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby Gooner91 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:13 pm

xoxo, gossipgirl wrote:hey all, i think i should've been clearer. i'm not trying to ignore anyone's advice, but i posted the schools i did not because i'm hoping someone will convince me to add more schools, but because those are the only ones I want. I appreciate everything that's been said on here, but a lot of it doesn't apply to me at all. and i know that that's not the way everyone's law school journey works, but i have a lot of different things to factor in other than 'will i have a certain kind of job at the end of this'. when i posted, i was really hoping for more specific chances in regards to the schools i listed. instead i've gotten a lot of (great, but irrelevant for me) advice on how to go about changing all the things i've decided i want because that fits better into the mold for what a law school applicant needs to want. i guess this may have been the wrong place to look for school specific answers at- does anyone know how i can move this post from the chance me board to school specific boards?

thanks yall! I really do appreciate your answers, but they weren't answers to the questions i asked. (my own fault, i could have been clearer about that.)

:)


Why does this information not apply to you? What is so different about your situation?

You can believe anything you want about your situation being different and why data and facts do not apply to you. However, if you want other people to believe these things are true you need to provide some justification for that belief, which you have failed to do. Unless you can explain why the things law school students ought to consider when choosing a law school do not apply to you people are going to rightly assume you are not informed.

On another note, I am not totally sure how URM boost works but I would guess considering your low GPA (I think 3.2 LSAC GPA?) you should try to retake and get your LSAT up to make up for the low GPA, maybe into the low to mid 160's may be sufficient. You could play around with LSAT scores on the predictor website to get a better idea as suggested earlier in the thread.
You can punch above your numbers a bit if you have a strong application and softs but it is not going to really help unless you have somewhat competitive numbers.
Last edited by Gooner91 on Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
midnight_circus
Posts: 183
Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2013 12:36 am

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby midnight_circus » Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:16 pm

xoxo, gossipgirl wrote:hey all, i think i should've been clearer. i'm not trying to ignore anyone's advice, but i posted the schools i did not because i'm hoping someone will convince me to add more schools, but because those are the only ones I want. I appreciate everything that's been said on here, but a lot of it doesn't apply to me at all. and i know that that's not the way everyone's law school journey works, but i have a lot of different things to factor in other than 'will i have a certain kind of job at the end of this'. when i posted, i was really hoping for more specific chances in regards to the schools i listed. instead i've gotten a lot of (great, but irrelevant for me) advice on how to go about changing all the things i've decided i want because that fits better into the mold for what a law school applicant needs to want. i guess this may have been the wrong place to look for school specific answers at- does anyone know how i can move this post from the chance me board to school specific boards?

thanks yall! I really do appreciate your answers, but they weren't answers to the questions i asked. (my own fault, i could have been clearer about that.)

:)


I normally try to be nicer than this, but there's only one way to put this and it isn't nice: You're wrong.
We're not convincing you to add more schools, we're convincing you NOT to apply to the TTTT trash you picked because whatever "journey" you think you'll be embarking on after law school will lead you straight to the unemployment office/Starbucks--and I assume if you were comfortable with that you would've remained an actor--and replace them with viable options that could get you exactly what you said you wanted: a legal career doing "social justice."
Based on your posts, you're a wreck. You need to step back and evaluate this from a calm and rational perspective. Unless you have children/family you can't leave or some other extreme and tangible tie to a very specific area, there cannot be a more important consideration than your ability to repay the $200,000+ debt you will be taking on to go to law school. If your sponsorship that you so briefly mentioned makes debt not a problem, we might be dealing with a different set of priorities. Until then, if you say something is more important than your ability to get a job, you're wrong.
This is not to say that you always need to choose the school that offers you the largest shot at employment every single time. Within roughly peer school ranges, there are always other reasons to pick one school over another. The perpetual NYU v Columbia debate can attest to that, or Harvard v. Chicago. No reason (except for the extreme and tangible ties, or perhaps and only perhaps if you got in for free) is powerful enough to choose Chapman over Cornell or Loyola over Northwestern.
(If the cold is in any way a factor, it shouldn't be. There is only a 7 degree difference in the average lows between both Ithaca and NYC and Chicago and NYC. This is negligible. You wouldn't be moving to the tundra. The difference is vanishingly insignificant when comparing what actually matters, which is employment data. I learned this by doing quick research, which is all it takes to see how insane the plan you're advocating is.)

We know we didn't answer your question. Your question is the wrong question. When my kid asks how long it takes the stork to deliver a baby, I'm not going to answer that either. It's the wrong question. I'm going to tell them the truth. That's what we're doing with you.

I try not to argue with irrational people. It makes my head hurt. So unless you propose a rational counterargument to what we've all said, I'm done here. Please retake. Please reconsider your priorities. You say you don't want to be a "hobo 4 lyfe." So don't go to Chapman. Retake and go to Northwestern and actually be a lawyer.

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

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 5:19 pm

xoxo, gossipgirl wrote:hey all, i think i should've been clearer. i'm not trying to ignore anyone's advice, but i posted the schools i did not because i'm hoping someone will convince me to add more schools, but because those are the only ones I want. I appreciate everything that's been said on here, but a lot of it doesn't apply to me at all. and i know that that's not the way everyone's law school journey works, but i have a lot of different things to factor in other than 'will i have a certain kind of job at the end of this'. when i posted, i was really hoping for more specific chances in regards to the schools i listed. instead i've gotten a lot of (great, but irrelevant for me) advice on how to go about changing all the things i've decided i want because that fits better into the mold for what a law school applicant needs to want. i guess this may have been the wrong place to look for school specific answers at- does anyone know how i can move this post from the chance me board to school specific boards?

thanks yall! I really do appreciate your answers, but they weren't answers to the questions i asked. (my own fault, i could have been clearer about that.)

:)


Again, this is like driving to the automile, pulling up to several different car dealerships, and announcing "I am buying a car today from one of these places, regardless of my budget or what I need the car to do." This is a really bad mentality to have when making a 200K+ investment.

xoxo, gossipgirl
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 3:23 am

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby xoxo, gossipgirl » Tue Dec 10, 2013 6:20 pm

thanks for all the input guys. i'm came to this thread with the impression that this was the place to ask questions about chances at specific schools, and i was wrong about that. i pm'd my question to two people from the schools i actually care about and got my answer pretty straightforwardly. i appreciate the whole college adviser attitude you guys have, because some people might find that helpful, but that's not what i asked for. so if you think i'm a wreck or that i should apply to schools that i know right now i don't want to go to, you could've saved some time and kept it to yourself. the question i asked was do i have a chance at *these specific schools*. not should i apply to four more, should i apply to better schools, should do this or that. so for the people who actually answered my question, i'm super appreciative. for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals (again, not everyone wanted to be a big firm lawyer) .... well, yall we're the best advisers of all time. of all time! *kanye voice*

love,
the wreck

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

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:22 pm

"for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals"

You seem to have no idea how to achieve a social justice/entertainment law career or how viable that is based on your current options. It would be like if I went to a board full of ex-college baseball players and told them I wanted to play shortstop for either the Yankees or Red Sox, and that their advice that dropping 200K on hitting lessons was unnecessary because they know "nothing about my own personal goals." On the contrary, the lawyers and law students on this board know more about your personal goals than you do, in the same way that the baseball players would know that a 25 year old with three months of intermural softball experience and -3.5 vision in both eyes will never play major league baseball.

User avatar
Gooner91
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby Gooner91 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:27 pm

timbs4339 wrote:"for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals"

You seem to have no idea how to achieve a social justice/entertainment law career or how viable that is based on your current options. It would be like if I went to a board full of ex-college baseball players and told them I wanted to play shortstop for either the Yankees or Red Sox, and that their advice that dropping 200K on hitting lessons was unnecessary because they know "nothing about my own personal goals." On the contrary, the lawyers and law students on this board know more about your personal goals than you do, in the same way that the baseball players would know that a 25 year old with three months of intermural softball experience and -3.5 vision in both eyes will never play major league baseball.


It seems like the OPs goal is not to be a professional baseball player though, their goal is just to take hitting lessons.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby PepperJack » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:28 pm

OP: I went to TISCH too. Higher GPA, and opposite impact in that I got all A's in acting and never studied for anything else. It's not a plus for admissions. If anything, it's a negative. When it comes to the job hunt -> you need to convince employers you're not a flight risk once you land that 20 million dollar role. I really got this question multiple times to which I had to either lie or reply, "For 20 million dollars, of course I would leave."

To other people: this is a failed actress so the specialist of special snowflakes. You cannot reason with the failed actress with logic or evidence. You must placate or ignore.

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

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:30 pm

Gooner91 wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:"for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals"

You seem to have no idea how to achieve a social justice/entertainment law career or how viable that is based on your current options. It would be like if I went to a board full of ex-college baseball players and told them I wanted to play shortstop for either the Yankees or Red Sox, and that their advice that dropping 200K on hitting lessons was unnecessary because they know "nothing about my own personal goals." On the contrary, the lawyers and law students on this board know more about your personal goals than you do, in the same way that the baseball players would know that a 25 year old with three months of intermural softball experience and -3.5 vision in both eyes will never play major league baseball.


It seems like the OPs goal is not to be a professional baseball player though, their goal is just to take hitting lessons.


Was that the impression you got? It seemed like the OP wants a job as an entertainment lawyer or agent and thinks the JD will get her there, rather than just trying to do something other than work as a bartender while handing out headshots.

User avatar
Gooner91
Posts: 1376
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2013 5:34 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby Gooner91 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 7:35 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
Gooner91 wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:"for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals"

You seem to have no idea how to achieve a social justice/entertainment law career or how viable that is based on your current options. It would be like if I went to a board full of ex-college baseball players and told them I wanted to play shortstop for either the Yankees or Red Sox, and that their advice that dropping 200K on hitting lessons was unnecessary because they know "nothing about my own personal goals." On the contrary, the lawyers and law students on this board know more about your personal goals than you do, in the same way that the baseball players would know that a 25 year old with three months of intermural softball experience and -3.5 vision in both eyes will never play major league baseball.


It seems like the OPs goal is not to be a professional baseball player though, their goal is just to take hitting lessons.


Was that the impression you got? It seemed like the OP wants a job as an entertainment lawyer or agent and thinks the JD will get her there, rather than just trying to do something other than work as a bartender while handing out headshots.


The main post is gone now so I cannot go back and look. I was under the impression the OP wanted to go to certain law schools for whatever inane reason and did not give it much though beyond that. I could be wrong.

I thought someone else in the thread suggested that entertainment law was the goal but I do not think OP confirmed it as the case.

Cellar-door
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 4:33 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby Cellar-door » Tue Dec 10, 2013 9:26 pm

Gooner91 wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:
Gooner91 wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:"for the people who think they can change the mind of someone on the internet because they've posted on a board 1000+ times but know next to nothing about my own personal goals"

You seem to have no idea how to achieve a social justice/entertainment law career or how viable that is based on your current options. It would be like if I went to a board full of ex-college baseball players and told them I wanted to play shortstop for either the Yankees or Red Sox, and that their advice that dropping 200K on hitting lessons was unnecessary because they know "nothing about my own personal goals." On the contrary, the lawyers and law students on this board know more about your personal goals than you do, in the same way that the baseball players would know that a 25 year old with three months of intermural softball experience and -3.5 vision in both eyes will never play major league baseball.


It seems like the OPs goal is not to be a professional baseball player though, their goal is just to take hitting lessons.


Was that the impression you got? It seemed like the OP wants a job as an entertainment lawyer or agent and thinks the JD will get her there, rather than just trying to do something other than work as a bartender while handing out headshots.


The main post is gone now so I cannot go back and look. I was under the impression the OP wanted to go to certain law schools for whatever inane reason and did not give it much though beyond that. I could be wrong.

I thought someone else in the thread suggested that entertainment law was the goal but I do not think OP confirmed it as the case.

Probably me.
I asked what she wanted to do with her hypothetical law degree, and speculated Entertainment law based on: What do NYC and LA have in common that another similar sized city (say Chicago) would not and all I could come up with was entertainment industry, also because she went to Tisch.

User avatar
logical seasoning
Posts: 117
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2013 1:26 am

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby logical seasoning » Tue Dec 10, 2013 9:27 pm

PepperJack wrote:
To other people: this is a failed actress so the specialist of special snowflakes. You cannot reason with the failed actress with logic or evidence. You must placate or ignore.


interesting

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

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 9:51 pm

PepperJack wrote:When it comes to the job hunt -> you need to convince employers you're not a flight risk once you land that 20 million dollar role. I really got this question multiple times to which I had to either lie or reply, "For 20 million dollars, of course I would leave."


Good practice if you apply for "JD Advantage" jobs after law school.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby PepperJack » Tue Dec 10, 2013 10:47 pm

timbs4339 wrote:
PepperJack wrote:When it comes to the job hunt -> you need to convince employers you're not a flight risk once you land that 20 million dollar role. I really got this question multiple times to which I had to either lie or reply, "For 20 million dollars, of course I would leave."


Good practice if you apply for "JD Advantage" jobs after law school.

It is a disadvantage for that reason, and rather absurd if I may be so bold. I wish one could reply, "That's a great question. Would you work 2,000 hours a year for 1% of that money, or sit on a beach fingering multiple bikini models?" It's ridiculous how ignorant lawyers can be of stuff outside of law. The odds of any theater student getting a 20 million dollar role are analogous to the odds of a political science student winning the lotto. Yet you never hear the partner say, "Before we hire you, we must know, what will you do if you win tomorrow night's Powerball?"

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

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby timbs4339 » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:00 pm

PepperJack wrote:
timbs4339 wrote:
PepperJack wrote:When it comes to the job hunt -> you need to convince employers you're not a flight risk once you land that 20 million dollar role. I really got this question multiple times to which I had to either lie or reply, "For 20 million dollars, of course I would leave."


Good practice if you apply for "JD Advantage" jobs after law school.

It is a disadvantage for that reason, and rather absurd if I may be so bold. I wish one could reply, "That's a great question. Would you work 2,000 hours a year for 1% of that money, or sit on a beach fingering multiple bikini models?" It's ridiculous how ignorant lawyers can be of stuff outside of law. The odds of any theater student getting a 20 million dollar role are analogous to the odds of a political science student winning the lotto. Yet you never hear the partner say, "Before we hire you, we must know, what will you do if you win tomorrow night's Powerball?"


They may be projecting or trying to hope vicariously through you.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby PepperJack » Tue Dec 10, 2013 11:03 pm

Trexes are birds
Last edited by PepperJack on Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby PepperJack » Thu Dec 12, 2013 6:49 pm

OP will go to a poor school, be bottom of the curve, become jobless and then either woo a dorky guy who will eat her debt or wind up homeless again. Attractive people rarely wind up homeless the first time so the betting odds favor number two. When you combine heavy idealism, stubborness, mental instability, lack of special skills and poor pre-frontal cortex functioning homelessness becomes possible.

User avatar
midwest17
Posts: 1686
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2013 5:27 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby midwest17 » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:10 pm

PepperJack wrote:OP will go to a poor school, be bottom of the curve, become jobless and then either woo a dorky guy who will eat her debt or wind up homeless again. Attractive people rarely wind up homeless the first time so the betting odds favor number two. When you combine heavy idealism, stubborness, mental instability, lack of special skills and poor pre-frontal cortex functioning homelessness becomes possible.


Check your privilege.

User avatar
PepperJack
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Sep 29, 2013 1:23 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby PepperJack » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:21 pm

Not rich, and have seen hardship. Being homeless requires not being useful enough for anyone to house you, and not likable enough for anyone to help you. If you're in that position then it's irrational to think you'll turn a TT at sticker into loan repayment and shelter. Hardship is valuable when it builds character and grit, not special snowflake syndrome. What will OP learn in law school that will make her more productive and useful to avoid a similar play out of events? You only learn how to "think like a lawyer" which means learning laws with no practical relevance outside of law, and how to argue. If OP didn't have the people skills or work ethic to get a job managing a small restaurant in NYC (the 500 a week cash is enough to avoid homelessness), she needs a tier 1 with a scholly or t-14. How does someone go from being homeless to getting a job from a TT for the 80k plus needed to repay loans and survive.
Last edited by PepperJack on Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

HYSenberg
Posts: 265
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2013 8:10 pm

Re: 3.2 / 158, SORRY FOR THE WORD VOMIT SORRY

Postby HYSenberg » Thu Dec 12, 2013 7:40 pm

midwest17 wrote:
PepperJack wrote:OP will go to a poor school, be bottom of the curve, become jobless and then either woo a dorky guy who will eat her debt or wind up homeless again. Attractive people rarely wind up homeless the first time so the betting odds favor number two. When you combine heavy idealism, stubborness, mental instability, lack of special skills and poor pre-frontal cortex functioning homelessness becomes possible.


Check your privilege.

I don't think he's so far off.




Return to “What are my chances?”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests