,, Forum

[manofjustice]

Rayiner as usual makes sense. But we need to bottom-line it and (hopefully) agree: at this point, in the final analysis, law school costs too much and (as a corollary) BigLaw salaries are minimally acceptable. Either the former has to go down, or the latter should at least keep strict pace with inflation.

Law school costs too much. It's taking up increasingly larger fractions of the net value added by getting a T14 JD. Law schools are effectively oligopolies (the very existence of the "T14" concept bears that out), so it is no surprise they can continue to expand to capture more and more of the value added by the degree. I'm one of those leftists who thinks their oligopoly and tax-advantaged status warrants strict regulation, and at a more philosophical level that educational institutions shouldn't be in the business of trying to extract all of the value they add to students' careers.

Not to go off-topic, haha, but do we know how much the average amount of tuition actually paid has increased, inflation-adjusted? For UG, the average amount paid (inflation-adjusted) has actually only slightly increased. Sticker price has increased dramatically, but so has financial aid. I'm curious if it is a similar situation for law school.

If you think taking out loans to pay for law school at sticker is crazy, that's nothing compared to people who hit that debt level for UG. I'm not completely on the law school costs too much bandwagon because I think sticker is still well worth it if you make it to biglaw. Thus, sticker price shouldn't necessarily be reduced as much as debt loads should be lessened for people who miss out on biglaw.

Don't conflate the issues. It's possible for law school to both cost too much and also be worth the investment.

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

[birdlaw117]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

[manofjustice]

Rayiner as usual makes sense. But we need to bottom-line it and (hopefully) agree: at this point, in the final analysis, law school costs too much and (as a corollary) BigLaw salaries are minimally acceptable. Either the former has to go down, or the latter should at least keep strict pace with inflation.

Law school costs too much. It's taking up increasingly larger fractions of the net value added by getting a T14 JD. Law schools are effectively oligopolies (the very existence of the "T14" concept bears that out), so it is no surprise they can continue to expand to capture more and more of the value added by the degree. I'm one of those leftists who thinks their oligopoly and tax-advantaged status warrants strict regulation, and at a more philosophical level that educational institutions shouldn't be in the business of trying to extract all of the value they add to students' careers.

Not to go off-topic, haha, but do we know how much the average amount of tuition actually paid has increased, inflation-adjusted? For UG, the average amount paid (inflation-adjusted) has actually only slightly increased. Sticker price has increased dramatically, but so has financial aid. I'm curious if it is a similar situation for law school.

If you think taking out loans to pay for law school at sticker is crazy, that's nothing compared to people who hit that debt level for UG. I'm not completely on the law school costs too much bandwagon because I think sticker is still well worth it if you make it to biglaw. Thus, sticker price shouldn't necessarily be reduced as much as debt loads should be lessened for people who miss out on biglaw.

Hmmmmm......for realz?

Well, first, not quite right on UG. See http://inflationdata.com/inflation/infl ... lation.asp and --LinkRemoved--

Second, law schools have increased tuition at three times the pace of inflation for the last 25 years. This has resulted the quintupling of (private) law school tuition since 1985. Tuition has increased exponentially. It took 11 years to increase the first 10 grand, 8 years for the next 10 grand, 5 years for the last, and we are work on our next 10 grand now.

http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/ ... eckdam.pdf

http://www.nationaljurist.com/content/t ... buck-trend

"Tuition for private law schools grew from an average of $21,790 in 2000 to $37,702 in 2010, an increase of 73 percent...Overall, however, only eleven law schools have kept tuition below 60 percent growth over the past ten years. Inflation has grown by 25 percent over the same period."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119040786780835602.html

"Tuition growth at law schools has almost tripled the rate of inflation over the past 20 years, leading to higher debt for students and making starting salaries for most graduates less manageable, especially in expensive cities."

--LinkRemoved--

[manofjustice]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

I don't disagree, on the individual level.

[sunynp]

Rayiner as usual makes sense. But we need to bottom-line it and (hopefully) agree: at this point, in the final analysis, law school costs too much and (as a corollary) BigLaw salaries are minimally acceptable. Either the former has to go down, or the latter should at least keep strict pace with inflation.

Law school costs too much. It's taking up increasingly larger fractions of the net value added by getting a T14 JD. Law schools are effectively oligopolies (the very existence of the "T14" concept bears that out), so it is no surprise they can continue to expand to capture more and more of the value added by the degree. I'm one of those leftists who thinks their oligopoly and tax-advantaged status warrants strict regulation, and at a more philosophical level that educational institutions shouldn't be in the business of trying to extract all of the value they add to students' careers.

Not to go off-topic, haha, but do we know how much the average amount of tuition actually paid has increased, inflation-adjusted? For UG, the average amount paid (inflation-adjusted) has actually only slightly increased. Sticker price has increased dramatically, but so has financial aid. I'm curious if it is a similar situation for law school.

If you think taking out loans to pay for law school at sticker is crazy, that's nothing compared to people who hit that debt level for UG. I'm not completely on the law school costs too much bandwagon because I think sticker is still well worth it if you make it to biglaw. Thus, sticker price shouldn't necessarily be reduced as much as debt loads should be lessened for people who miss out on biglaw.

I just want to share some data on the bolded point: This article explains how law school tuition may have in general actually decreased for 2011 but also has tons of data and charts showing adjusted for inflation tuition increases from 2004 -2011.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/amlawdail ... ubble.html

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/.a/6a00e5 ... 7e2970c-pi

And about the increase in salaries - I remember seeing data linking the increase in starting salary with the increase in rent in Manhattan over the past 20 years. I think there is some correlation as to how much associates have to pay in rent with how much firms pay, there may also be some correlation to debt load that associates carry, but I am not sure how much firms look at that in determining salaries. Not that salaries are going up anytime soon.

[IAFG]

The problem is one to take up with law schools and the legislature, not the V100. Your misplaced blame is making you look entitled.

[sunynp]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

Well. there are strong claims to injustice based on the horribly misleading employment statistics every school was throwing around. Even now a lot of schools publish bad and misleading employment statistics. There is still a long way to go but LST has done a great job at getting data from schools.

[IAFG]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

Well. there are strong claims to injustice based on the horribly misleading employment statistics every school was throwing around. Even now a lot of schools publish bad and misleading employment statistics. There is still a long way to go but LST has done a great job at getting data from schools.

That's not applicable to anyone in biglaw, which seems to be the subject at hand. Unless you know of some school that implied biglaw pays more than $160k

[sunynp]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

Well. there are strong claims to injustice based on the horribly misleading employment statistics every school was throwing around. Even now a lot of schools publish bad and misleading employment statistics. There is still a long way to go but LST has done a great job at getting data from schools.

That's not applicable to anyone in biglaw, which seems to be the subject at hand. Unless you know of some school that implied biglaw pays more than $160k

Ah sorry I didn't read back more into the thread. I think that schools misled prospective students as to the number of them that could expect biglaw and a biglaw salary, but that may be off topic for this discussion now.

[birdlaw117]

Precisely. Hence the "right to "complain"" (complain in quotes) while cashing the paycheck.

No. You can complain if there is some sort of injustice. But you knew ahead of time what you were getting yourself into.

Well. there are strong claims to injustice based on the horribly misleading employment statistics every school was throwing around. Even now a lot of schools publish bad and misleading employment statistics. There is still a long way to go but LST has done a great job at getting data from schools.

That's not applicable to anyone in biglaw, which seems to be the subject at hand. Unless you know of some school that implied biglaw pays more than $160k

Yep. Though I do think it is tangentially applicable/related, but not quite the point here.

This is more of a "I won the law school game but I still lost" complaint. Which I think is crap.

[manofjustice]

The idea that getting a big law job is an unqualified triumph is the very mentality that keeps students coming back to law schools for more financial punishment. A more evenhanded approach should govern.

And RE: It's not the V10s fault--that's true. But the burden law schools place on the V10s labor pool should be shared between the V10 and their associates.

[NJPitcher]

The idea that getting a big law job is an unqualified triumph is the very mentality that keeps students coming back to law schools for more financial punishment. A more evenhanded approach should govern.

And RE: It's not the V10s fault--that's true. But the burden law schools place on the V10s labor pool should be shared between the V10 and their associates.

Because the V10 are substantially different from the rest of the V100... anyways.

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network. But if you're claiming that getting biglaw isn't a triumph then you may have deeper concerns with our economy that the V100 can't help you with.

[vanwinkle]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

[RedBirds2011]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

[20130312]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

Even "full time long term bar required jobs" is a shady category. If a school employs one of their own students for 35 hours a week at minimum wage for one year, they can be included in that category.

[RedBirds2011]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

Even "full time long term bar required jobs" is a shady category. If a school employs one of their own students for 35 hours a week at minimum wage for one year, they can be included in that category.

Lol jesus christ people. They already have a separate category for that. I imagine they would be included in the "school funded" jobs category bro.

[20130312]

Even "full time long term bar required jobs" is a shady category. If a school employs one of their own students for 35 hours a week at minimum wage for one year, they can be included in that category.

Lol jesus christ people. They already have a separate category for that. I imagine they would be included in the "school funded" jobs category bro.

ORLY?!

•81.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs. This figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs.

[RedBirds2011]

Even "full time long term bar required jobs" is a shady category. If a school employs one of their own students for 35 hours a week at minimum wage for one year, they can be included in that category.

Lol jesus christ people. They already have a separate category for that. I imagine they would be included in the "school funded" jobs category bro.

ORLY?!

•81.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs. This figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs.

It says "this includes NO school funded job" bro. HTH

--LinkRemoved--

[20130312]

It says "this includes NO school funded job" bro. HTH

--LinkRemoved--

For LSU, you're correct. But as shown in the link I provided above, a school can get away with exactly what I described. It's not a separate category, that's why LST specifically says "[t]his figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs."

If that's one way of gaming the system, I'm sure there's another that LSU could be using to inflate their numbers.

[rayiner]

LSU had 176 graduates. Of those, 143 are counted as full-time, long-term bar required.

3 of those are solos. 53 are at firms of 2-10. 35 are at firms larger than 10. 13 are in business/industry. 20 are in government/PI. 8 are in federal clerkships, 23 are in state and local clerkships. This adds up to > 143 presumably because some of those business/industry people are not in bar passage-required employment.

Overall, whether this is good or not depends on what you think happens to the 43% of the class that is working in firms of 2-10 attorneys or doing state/local clerkships. This is certainly not high-paying work, but resident cost of attendance at LSU is only $35,000.

I'm liable to believe that folks at LSU are doing pretty good. Louisiana is a state of 4.5m people, has a GDP of $213b, and is phenomenally insular. Moreover, LSU is a small school and graduated only 176 people last year. I find it quite credible that those 2-10 attorney firms are real firms and not a couple of unemployed grads getting together to hang a shingle.

Note that LSU's value proposition really turns on the low tuition and insular market. I think some schools, like UGA, are similarly situated. Most schools are not this way.

[RedBirds2011]

It says "this includes NO school funded job" bro. HTH

--LinkRemoved--

For LSU, you're correct. But as shown in the link I provided above, a school can get away with exactly what I described. It's not a separate category, that's why LST specifically says "[t]his figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs."

If that's one way of gaming the system, I'm sure there's another that LSU could be using to inflate their numbers.

My example was LSU from the beginning for vanwinkle. Theres a difference between healthy skepticism and then just assuming everything is questionable and everyone is lying. Also, the other blanket statements such as "everyone is fucked" is beyond annoying.

[vanwinkle]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

Can you say for sure that all or even most of those jobs pay at least $50K? Average starting salary for a public defender in LA is only around 40K, and Orleans Public Defenders just announced layoffs and budget cuts due to lack of funding.

[manofjustice]

Even "full time long term bar required jobs" is a shady category. If a school employs one of their own students for 35 hours a week at minimum wage for one year, they can be included in that category.

Lol jesus christ people. They already have a separate category for that. I imagine they would be included in the "school funded" jobs category bro.

ORLY?!

•81.3% of graduates were known to be employed in long-term, full-time legal jobs. This figure includes an unknown number school-funded jobs.

It says "this includes NO school funded job" bro. HTH

--LinkRemoved--

RedBirds, we already had a huge discussion on this in a couple of places. The list of the schools that do include school funded in long term full time bar required includes big names, including Harvard and UVa. GW got almost a 20 point boost in their employment score from this practice.

[manofjustice]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

Can you say for sure that all or even most of those jobs pay at least $50K? Average starting salary for a public defender in LA is only around 40K, and Orleans Public Defenders just announced layoffs and budget cuts due to lack of funding.

Ha. Try 15 bucks an hour...going to 10. (But I think you knew that...)

[RedBirds2011]

If a biglaw job isn't a triumph, and you're worried about debt, then why would you go to law school? I don't get it - if you just want to practice law and are ok making 50k/yr, then go to your local law school for little money and network.

You sound level-headed, but this is dumb. Right now the job market is so flooded with grads from top law schools eager to find any law job that going to a cheaper low-tier regional school (aka "local law school") is likely to lead to unemployment. "Network your way to a 50k job from a T2" is risky and not attainable for many. It's just as bad idea as aiming for BigLaw.

This isnt necessarily true. It depends on the school. LSU, a TT, places almost 80% in full time long term bar required jobs.

Can you say for sure that all or even most of those jobs pay at least $50K? Average starting salary for a public defender in LA is only around 40K, and Orleans Public Defenders just announced layoffs and budget cuts due to lack of funding.

They are going to be lower paying initially for smaller firms and lower paying for government positions as well. But with a total yearly nondiscounted COA of around $35,000, the salary isnt as important. LSU grads dont need biglaw to pay off loans for the most part.


Also, louisiana doesnt really have full time PD gigs outside of Orleans Parish. The public defense system is a travesty there. Its gotten better since katrina though. If someone wants to be a PD, I would recommend a state that actually has a solid PD system for work.