PSA: forget about specialties or professors--take the money Forum

[emu42]

I'm in international human rights/academia and still agreeing with DF and rayiner. This isn't just a big law thing.

I didn't mean to suggest taking the money is less important if you're interested in those things; if anything, it's more important. Although they'd probably tell you you're stupid for going for academia/PI.

[DELG]

I'm in international human rights/academia and still agreeing with DF and rayiner. This isn't just a big law thing.

I didn't mean to suggest taking the money is less important if you're interested in those things; if anything, it's more important. Although they'd probably tell you you're stupid for going for academia/PI.

Well if they won't say it, I will.

WT you frigging moron, quit your job right now and realize you're supposed to be unemployed and screwed

[09042014]

Manu, you're going to have to learn to ignore these people. TLS has had this debate countless times, and it always proceeds the same way: bitter biglawyers with loans tell everyone they're stupid for not taking the money, 0Ls respond by saying they don't want biglaw/have varied ambitions, bitter biglawyers respond by calling 0Ls unrealistic little K-JDs.

Desert Fox, Rayiner, etc. are right to a large degree; most 0Ls are unrealistic little K-JDs, and the far majority of time it's better to take the money and run. But the Desert Fox entourage tries to pidgeonhole everyone into a "biglaw or bust" mentality that is not reflective of so many people going to HYSxxx (where x is whichever school they're trashing at the moment (although it's usually HYS)). Where these bitter biglawyers fail is in not realizing that there are, in fact, a small minority of situations in which it is correct to turn down the money.

"Academia is impossible, might as well not even try" is a horribly deleterious attitude to have. It's true that an extremely small percentage of even Yale grads make it, but there is a significant degree of self selection. And if all goes wrong, they're still getting an awesome clerkship and biglaw job. If you truly want to be an academic, or get that prestigious government job, and you have the opportunity of attending a school that can get you there, I think you're less likely to regret taking the money than turning it down (once again, this applies to a small subset of people for a small subset of schools).

I've spoken to numerous of Harvard Law grads and all of them speak glowingly of their decision to attend. Everyone has different goals and a different financial situation, and there are great arguments in either direction. Money is the most important thing, but it's not the only thing, especially when the outcomes at these schools are so great. Some people love Yale's academia training program or fell in love with Palo Alto or have one professor at Harvard they really want to do research with.

So the Desert Fox argument is correct 95% of the time. If you're the 5% it doesn't apply to, don't bother picking a fight with them; they have no interest in listening to you.

You still aren't factoring the cost of the choices you are going to make. Just because YHS might be the best for academia, doesn't mean it's a smart choice in general. I'm not saying they shouldn't try, but they shouldn't take 275k debt at 7% interest to do it.

There are situations where you should turn down the money, but just thinking you want to be an academic isn't one of them.

IIRC manv0L is having his parents pay. That changes the math. If your parents can afford that, go right ahead. That isn't stupid at all.

But virtually everyone is just a dumb 0L who heard academia is preftstgious and thinks that is a great justification for going a quarter million dollars in debt.

[worldtraveler]

I'm in international human rights/academia and still agreeing with DF and rayiner. This isn't just a big law thing.

I didn't mean to suggest taking the money is less important if you're interested in those things; if anything, it's more important. Although they'd probably tell you you're stupid for going for academia/PI.

Well if they won't say it, I will.

WT you frigging moron, quit your job right now and realize you're supposed to be unemployed and screwed

My salary is so low it wouldn't be much of a difference.

[Pragmatic Gun]

Manu, you're going to have to learn to ignore these people. TLS has had this debate countless times, and it always proceeds the same way: bitter biglawyers with loans tell everyone they're stupid for not taking the money, 0Ls respond by saying they don't want biglaw/have varied ambitions, bitter biglawyers respond by calling 0Ls unrealistic little K-JDs.

Desert Fox, Rayiner, etc. are right to a large degree; most 0Ls are unrealistic little K-JDs, and the far majority of time it's better to take the money and run. But the Desert Fox entourage tries to pidgeonhole everyone into a "biglaw or bust" mentality that is not reflective of so many people going to HYSxxx (where x is whichever school they're trashing at the moment (although it's usually HYS)). Where these bitter biglawyers fail is in not realizing that there are, in fact, a small minority of situations in which it is correct to turn down the money.

"Academia is impossible, might as well not even try" is a horribly deleterious attitude to have. It's true that an extremely small percentage of even Yale grads make it, but there is a significant degree of self selection. And if all goes wrong, they're still getting an awesome clerkship and biglaw job. If you truly want to be an academic, or get that prestigious government job, and you have the opportunity of attending a school that can get you there, I think you're less likely to regret taking the money than turning it down (once again, this applies to a small subset of people for a small subset of schools).

I've spoken to numerous of Harvard Law grads and all of them speak glowingly of their decision to attend. Everyone has different goals and a different financial situation, and there are great arguments in either direction. Money is the most important thing, but it's not the only thing, especially when the outcomes at these schools are so great. Some people love Yale's academia training program or fell in love with Palo Alto or have one professor at Harvard they really want to do research with.

So the Desert Fox argument is correct 95% of the time. If you're the 5% it doesn't apply to, don't bother picking a fight with them; they have no interest in listening to you.

You still aren't factoring the cost of the choices you are going to make. Just because YHS might be the best for academia, doesn't mean it's a smart choice in general. I'm not saying they shouldn't try, but they shouldn't take 275k debt at 7% interest to do it.

There are situations where you should turn down the money, but just thinking you want to be an academic isn't one of them.

IIRC manv0L is having his parents pay. That changes the math. If your parents can afford that, go right ahead. That isn't stupid at all.

But virtually everyone is just a dumb 0L who heard academia is preftstgious and thinks that is a great justification for going a quarter million dollars in debt.

I wonder how many 0Ls want academia for its own sake.

[rayiner]

"Academia is impossible, might as well not even try" is a horribly deleterious attitude to have. It's true that an extremely small percentage of even Yale grads make it, but there is a significant degree of self selection. And if all goes wrong, they're still getting an awesome clerkship and biglaw job. If you truly want to be an academic, or get that prestigious government job, and you have the opportunity of attending a school that can get you there, I think you're less likely to regret taking the money than turning it down (once again, this applies to a small subset of people for a small subset of schools).

I know an aspiring academic who has a PhD, a prestigious fellowship, VAP appointments at T10's, a COA clerkship, and is still looking for a tenure-track job. It's a really rough road to hoe, and starry-eyed HYS admits don't have a good perspective on how rough.

There were 106 tenure-track hires last year, and that number has been trending down since the mid-2000's: http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblaw ... -2013.html. And while tenure has been pretty freely given at law schools to date, I wouldn't count on that continuing to be the case as the majority of law schools start facing an enrollment crunch over the next 10 years.

If you want a practical shot at academia, get an advanced degree then go to Yale, where 7-8% of each class has gotten a tenure-track position over the last few years. Because even at Harvard, you're looking at 2-4% of each class getting a tenure-track job (versus 2-3% from U of Chicago or 1% at the lower T-14). If you don't even have an advanced degree and are telling me you're pinning your hopes on academia, well I think I'm rightfully skeptical.

As for "prestigious government jobs," the ones that actually give a bump to HYS, e.g. Solicitor General's office, are even harder to get than academia, and basically require a SCOTUS clerkship. Even at HYS, only about 2% of people will get a SCOTUS clerkship. Most government jobs actually give less of a bump for HYS than does big law. E.g. DOJ Honors is more willing to take good students from lower-ranked schools than say Cravath. And DOJ Honors is insanely competitive. There were 28 positions last year outside the immigration section.

Some people love Yale's academia training program or fell in love with Palo Alto or have one professor at Harvard they really want to do research with.

The vast majority of people for which this is true will not get a tenure-track academic job and will have been better off taking the money at a lower-ranked school. The fact that you say they'll just fall back on an "awesome clerkship and biglaw job" suggests you think there is such a thing as an "awesome . . . biglaw job." Big law is particularly soul crushing for academically minded people.

[emu42]

"Academia is impossible, might as well not even try" is a horribly deleterious attitude to have. It's true that an extremely small percentage of even Yale grads make it, but there is a significant degree of self selection. And if all goes wrong, they're still getting an awesome clerkship and biglaw job. If you truly want to be an academic, or get that prestigious government job, and you have the opportunity of attending a school that can get you there, I think you're less likely to regret taking the money than turning it down (once again, this applies to a small subset of people for a small subset of schools).

I know an aspiring academic who has a PhD, a prestigious fellowship, VAP appointments at T10's, a COA clerkship, and is still looking for a tenure-track job. It's a really rough road to hoe, and starry-eyed HYS admits don't have a good perspective on how rough.

There were 106 tenure-track hires last year, and that number has been trending down since the mid-2000's: http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblaw ... -2013.html. And while tenure has been pretty freely given at law schools to date, I wouldn't count on that continuing to be the case as the majority of law schools start facing an enrollment crunch over the next 10 years.

If you want a practical shot at academia, get an advanced degree then go to Yale, where 7-8% of each class has gotten a tenure-track position over the last few years. Because even at Harvard, you're looking at 2-4% of each class getting a tenure-track job (versus 2-3% from U of Chicago or 1% at the lower T-14). If you don't even have an advanced degree and are telling me you're pinning your hopes on academia, well I think I'm rightfully skeptical.

As for "prestigious government jobs," the ones that actually give a bump to HYS, e.g. Solicitor General's office, are even harder to get than academia, and basically require a SCOTUS clerkship. Even at HYS, only about 2% of people will get a SCOTUS clerkship. Most government jobs actually give less of a bump for HYS than does big law. E.g. DOJ Honors is more willing to take good students from lower-ranked schools than say Cravath. And DOJ Honors is insanely competitive. There were 28 positions last year outside the immigration section.

Some people love Yale's academia training program or fell in love with Palo Alto or have one professor at Harvard they really want to do research with.

The vast majority of people for which this is true will not get a tenure-track academic job and will have been better off taking the money at a lower-ranked school. The fact that you say they'll just fall back on an "awesome clerkship and biglaw job" suggests you think there is such a thing as an "awesome . . . biglaw job." Big law is particularly soul crushing for academically minded people.

All fair points. Regarding the good biglaw job thing, I was operating under the assumption that all of these people are set on going to law school anyway (your criticism is more a reason to forego law school altogether). And well duh, if someone is choosing between Stanford and a full ride at a top 6 school and the only thing they like more about Stanford is Palo Alto, they should take the money. But law school decisions do not exist in a vacuum. There are a lot of variables, from money to location to specializations, that the prospective student should take into account.

[rad lulz]

.

[Theopliske8711]

Just the very thought of having such little control over where you end up makes academia a nightmare, let alone getting a job.

[njdevils2626]

And well duh, if someone is choosing between Stanford and a full ride at a top 6 school and the only thing they like more about Stanford is Palo Alto, they should take the money. But law school decisions do not exist in a vacuum. There are a lot of variables, from money to location to specializations, that the prospective student should take into account.

That's your opinion. The argument in the OP is that differing factors such as the bolded are not valid points of determination between law schools with different COA

[rayiner]

All fair points. Regarding the good biglaw job thing, I was operating under the assumption that all of these people are set on going to law school anyway (your criticism is more a reason to forego law school altogether).

Yes, lots of people who go to law school, even ones that go to HYS, should seriously consider forgoing law school altogether. Doing big law has a tremendous impact on the structure of your life. You really have to shape your life around your job. It's not good to think of it as a "good fallback" for those who really want academia. Your fallback should be a career track you'd be happy doing, especially when there's an 80-90% chance you'll have to rely on your fallback.

But law school decisions do not exist in a vacuum. There are a lot of variables, from money to location to specializations, that the prospective student should take into account.

The whole point of my OP is that law applicants overestimate the value of certain variables, like specializations, and underestimate the value of other variables, like cost. If prospective law students had a more accurate perception of how much specializations or working with particular professors actually impacts your career (and the answer is very little, even for 90% of the folks at HYS), then law schools couldn't use things like specializations as a crutch to justify raising tuition.

[Pragmatic Gun]

If someone is really that enchanted with government or international affairs, then a masters in the field would be leas financially onerous.

[koalacity]

Also, I'm not even going to be on TLS starting this fall. And my manu identity matters here only.

LJL

Plenty of us megaposters are going to H, and you'd be surprised at how easily people get matched up with their TLS identities. Plus, given how truly awful you are online, I imagine you'll act similarly IRL.

[goldenflash19]

It's funny that Manu has had such a big change of heart in the last few weeks because (while he was on the waitlist at H, ironically) he appeared in every single H vs X thread in the choosing forum and argued against H.

[koalacity]

It's funny that Manu has had such a big change of heart in the last few weeks because (while he was on the waitlist at H, ironically) he appeared in every single H vs X thread in the choosing forum and argued against H.

Gunners gonna gun.

[jbagelboy]

manu and emu always make things interesting.

as someone who worked in consulting prior to coming to law school, I'll say it's truly idiotic to spend $250,000, regardless of whose money it is, and three extra years of your life in law school, just to go work at a consulting firm or bank as a junior manager or senior consultant. I may transition back into strategy down the road, but certainly not at the same level as someone emerging from an all paid 2-year MBA program. Besides, as others noted, getting an offer at a consulting firm has a lot less to do with "doors" and whether you go to Harvard or Duke or wherever else among the top schools, and more to do with your background, case interviewing skills, and personality.

[emu42]

manu and emu always make things interesting.

Whoah whoah don't lump manu and I together...it's one thing to be willfully obtuse, and it's another to be altogether obtuse. Although, honestly, it's the internet, dude, and it's pretty dumb to suggest that manu in-person is an asshole just because he was pissed off for awhile that he didn't get into Harvard.

Yes, lots of people who go to law school, even ones that go to HYS, should seriously consider forgoing law school altogether.

Agreed, but once again this is an argument regarding the choice of law school, after the decision to go to some law school has been made.

The whole point of my OP is that law applicants overestimate the value of certain variables, like specializations, and underestimate the value of other variables, like cost. If prospective law students had a more accurate perception of how much specializations or working with particular professors actually impacts your career (and the answer is very little, even for 90% of the folks at HYS), then law schools couldn't use things like specializations as a crutch to justify raising tuition.

Again I agree, I just take issue with the notion that everything one does is with his or her post-college career in mind. Some people are legitimately interested in researching a particular topic, for example, even if they'll end up working on mergers for the next five years anyway. This is too stupid to continue debating, but I really do feel that most people who pay sticker or close to sticker at YHS don't regret their decision.

[bizzike]

I would love a T6 brochure that just said something like Attend XXX--because a salary matters more than comparative feminist law during the 19th century. I would attend someplace like that. Yeah.

[jdmonkey]

Huge agreement with all of this. Its just marketing that plays into what schools think prospective students want to hear. I once heard my school dean lamenting that the school had to add in so many stupid electives (she specifically mentioned "space law") for marketing purposes, while arguably useful courses such as franchising law were not added since its not as marketable a topic. Thus, even deans acknowledge this garbage is all about marketing.

Yes! My law school has a space law class, but only 1 section for corporations! the wait list for corporations is like 70 people. There is also no Con Law II next semester, but thank God we have a class on gambling law! Too bad the US doesn't even have a space program anymore. People were laughing about that class during registration. I guess you would have to practice in Russia if you even wanted to pursue such a career. Perhaps a perspective student should also be tested for mental competency for considering such garbage in the first place.

[manu6926]

...

[manu6926]

...

[manu6926]

...

[Pragmatic Gun]

I've spoken to numerous of Harvard Law grads and all of them speak glowingly of their decision to attend. Everyone has different goals and a different financial situation, and there are great arguments in either direction. Money is the most important thing, but it's not the only thing, especially when the outcomes at these schools are so great. Some people love Yale's academia training program or fell in love with Palo Alto or have one professor at Harvard they really want to do research with.

I understand. Money is important for me too. Hence, giving up the Columbia Butler when thinking of Columbia gets me excited too was not easy. I've had long discussions with my parents. You know what my father said? He told me that all the lawyers he talked to said that I should go to H without looking back. I thought maybe that's because they were never in that kind of situation. But really, what can you do when the ones that are paying for you want you to attend a particular school that you actually would love to attend? I may or may not regret my decision, likely depending on how well I do in Cambridge. Looking back though, I don't think I really had a choice.

First World Problems.

Did you really name drop Cambridge?

[NYSprague]

Well if your dad is paying and all his friends thinks Harvard is the way to go, why are you even arguing. You should have just said that in the first place.

I think the move to argue against Harvard and then take someone's spot off the wait list is one of the funniest things I've read about here.

I'm sure your classmates will be excited about that!

[manu6926]

...