bugsy33 wrote:Right, but here's the thing. We all play this game on TLS where we pretend to know that the market will still be shit in three years. We HAVE to tell people that the market will be shit in three years, otherwise people might start believe that law school is a good idea. The only way law grads can find consistent, quality work is if law schools stop overproducing JDs. This has pretty much already happened. People graduating in 2017 will be graduating in one of the smallest classes since the 1970s. This could very well be an excellent time to enroll in law school, however we cannot let people know that, lest more people enroll in law school and ruin any progress towards a balanced legal market.
the looming problem for incoming 1Ls isn't necessarily unemployment (though certain schools will always have mediocre employment numbers) but rising costs
Campos: Everybody knows in a vague way that the price of higher education has been outstripping inflation for a long time, but when you focus on actual numbers it's utterly astounding. In inflation-adjusted 2012 dollars, Harvard Law School in the 1950s cost $5,000 per year in tuition. By 1970, it was about $12,500 a year. By 1980, it was $16,000. By 1990, it was $27,000. By 2000, it was $35,000, and [in 2012 it was] $53,000. And Harvard Law School is completely typical because law schools, especially elite law schools, all tend to charge the same tuition. So Harvard Law School costs 10 times more in real dollars than it did 50 years ago.
with debt figures skyrocketing, an awful lot of people on the wrong end of that bimodal salary distribution are in for a rough go
even with paye/ibr
