My observation about the people on this board Forum

[aliarrow]

Straw man or not... I think he is right. There are a LOT of lower middle class (or even bottom rung) posters on the forum that are profoundly debt adverse. And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class.

This, this, this. $200,000 is a mind-numbing amount of money to me. I come from a pretty standard middle class family. I would never try to call myself poor, but I would never even dream of calling my family "rich." $200,000 is an amount of debt that I truly cannot fathom for educational debt. I don't think I've ever hand more than $5,000 or so in my bank account, and usually I live off my tips. The rich kids are usually the ones who have no concept of money at a young age, so I think it is the exact opposite of what aliarrow is saying.

While I do notice this in some threads, talking about law school in terms of ROI certainly isn't one of those ways to determine what socio-economic class someone is. It's just a smart way to look at any decision.

And also this.

Well again, I'm mainly speaking in terms of middle class vs. lower class. When I say lower class, I mean lower class. Example: try growing up with a single parent in a trailer, said parent is now going on their second bankruptcy and receiving food drive food in elementary school. You do that and see how willing you are to forgo an expensive graduate program in favor of sticking around the same shit neighborhoods with no connections, no job prospects, etc etc.

[bk1]

Straw man or not... I think he is right. There are a LOT of lower middle class (or even bottom rung) posters on the forum that are profoundly debt adverse. And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class.

I could see multiple reasons for this:

1. At lower SES, all the information out there says college is a golden ticket out of the poorhouse and all your family gets really pumped up about college/gradschool. The lay perception of what being a lawyer is like differs dramatically from reality.

2. People of lower SES who are applying to graduate school feel like they have overcome their situation and can do better then expected. They then expect this to transition to law school where they feel they will outperform their peers like they have always done (this sort of logic probably applies to all SES brackets though).

[aliarrow]

Straw man or not... I think he is right. There are a LOT of lower middle class (or even bottom rung) posters on the forum that are profoundly debt adverse. And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class.

I could see multiple reasons for this:

1. At lower SES, all the information out there says college is a golden ticket out of the poorhouse and all your family gets really pumped up about college/gradschool. The lay perception of what being a lawyer is like differs dramatically from reality.

2. People of lower SES who are applying to graduate school feel like they have overcome their situation and can do better then expected. They then expect this to transition to law school where they feel they will outperform their peers like they have always done (this sort of logic probably applies to all SES brackets though).

I agree with this

[firemed]

I changed my statement.... I was hoping to ninja it before it posted. Oh well. Here is what I wanted to say:

"And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class."

Maybe, but Life Experiences are very much influenced by Socioeconomic class (personality no, that's just a wildcard).

You could make the argument that personality is shaped by socioeconomic class as well. But neither life experiences nor personality are in any way guaranteed by socioeconomic class. I have met risk averse people who are rich, and risk averse people who are poor. There are too many factors to simply say "hey, socioeconomic class is the biggest driver of people's debt aversion".

[aliarrow]

I changed my statement.... I was hoping to ninja it before it posted. Oh well. Here is what I wanted to say:

"And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class."

Maybe, but Life Experiences are very much influenced by Socioeconomic class (personality no, that's just a wildcard).

You could make the argument that personality is shaped by socioeconomic class as well. But neither life experiences nor personality are in any way guaranteed by socioeconomic class. I have met risk averse people who are rich, and risk averse people who are poor. There are too many factors to simply say "hey, socioeconomic class is the biggest driver of people's debt aversion".

I agree that it wouldn't be a perfect correlation, but I think there is a correlation if you could somehow analyze the data.

[firemed]

Straw man or not... I think he is right. There are a LOT of lower middle class (or even bottom rung) posters on the forum that are profoundly debt adverse. And I think it might honestly be personal preference based off life experiences and personality... not Socioeconomic class.

I could see multiple reasons for this:

1. At lower SES, all the information out there says college is a golden ticket out of the poorhouse and all your family gets really pumped up about college/gradschool. The lay perception of what being a lawyer is like differs dramatically from reality.

2. People of lower SES who are applying to graduate school feel like they have overcome their situation and can do better then expected. They then expect this to transition to law school where they feel they will outperform their peers like they have always done (this sort of logic probably applies to all SES brackets though).

Yeah, but at what point does a smart kid from the barrio sit down and say "This is supposed to be my golden ticket out of the poorhouse... but $200,000 in loans strikes me as keeping me IN the poorhouse..." and decide they aren't going to take the loans- they'll find a better way to pay (Ie scholarship). A lot of people on this forum are smart cookies, including the poor ones. They aren't necessarily going to take more debt if they can help it... and might actually be more debt averse because they had to be really good with money to get to where they are today... or because they saw their dad's car repo'd and vowed never to let that happen to them... etc. etc. etc.

[firemed]

You could make the argument that personality is shaped by socioeconomic class as well. But neither life experiences nor personality are in any way guaranteed by socioeconomic class. I have met risk averse people who are rich, and risk averse people who are poor. There are too many factors to simply say "hey, socioeconomic class is the biggest driver of people's debt aversion".

I agree that it wouldn't be a perfect correlation, but I think there is a correlation if you could somehow analyze the data.

I wish I had the time to get my MA in Sociology. This (if it hasn't already been covered) would make a great research subject.

[bk1]

Yeah, but at what point does a smart kid from the barrio sit down and say "This is supposed to be my golden ticket out of the poorhouse... but $200,000 in loans strikes me as keeping me IN the poorhouse..." and decide they aren't going to take the loans- they'll find a better way to pay (Ie scholarship). A lot of people on this forum are smart cookies, including the poor ones. They aren't necessarily going to take more debt if they can help it... and might actually be more debt averse because they had to be really good with money to get to where they are today... or because they saw their dad's car repo'd and vowed never to let that happen to them... etc. etc. etc.

Just because you can get good grades doesn't mean you are smart with money/ROI (and vice versa). I mean I think those poor kids once confronted with the reality of the situation either realize their chances at 160k are low and thus don't take out 200k, or they continue along the line of thinking that they are a special snowflake who has overcome and will do so again in law school. But, the reality is that a lot of kids (poor and rich) don't think through the investment side of school since loans are handed out willy nilly.

[aliarrow]

Again, I just want to point out I think there is a misunderstanding somewhere. About 90% of the time I agree with Bk, Patriot, Romo, and Firemed. I know there are a LOT of similar posts out there that say "Im poor, Im going to go to Barry for a shot", and I think my post(s) had the misfortune of being lumped in by association. I'm not trying to qualify at what level going to law school for how much is smart/stupid. I'm just stating my belief there is a fairly justifiable difference in debt aversion from different classes.

[bk1]

Again, I just want to point out I think there is a misunderstanding somewhere. About 90% of the time I agree with Bk, Patriot, Romo, and Firemed. I know there are a LOT of similar posts out there that say "Im poor, Im going to go to Barry for a shot", and I think my post(s) had the misfortune of being lumped in by association. I'm not trying to qualify at what level going to law school for how much is smart/stupid. I'm just stating my belief there is a fairly justifiable difference in debt aversion from different classes.

It might be that higher SES kids have more debt-averse options (higher stats = higher scholly offers) whereas lower SES kids have riskier options (lower stats = lower scholly offers, or none at all) and thus try to reaffirm and defend taking on a lot of debt.

I also think that we advise people to be more debt averse than we might actually act because it is easier to apply rational thought to other people's decisions than it is to your own.

[whymeohgodno]

Yeah, but at what point does a smart kid from the barrio sit down and say "This is supposed to be my golden ticket out of the poorhouse... but $200,000 in loans strikes me as keeping me IN the poorhouse..." and decide they aren't going to take the loans- they'll find a better way to pay (Ie scholarship). A lot of people on this forum are smart cookies, including the poor ones. They aren't necessarily going to take more debt if they can help it... and might actually be more debt averse because they had to be really good with money to get to where they are today... or because they saw their dad's car repo'd and vowed never to let that happen to them... etc. etc. etc.

Just because you can get good grades doesn't mean you are smart with money/ROI (and vice versa). I mean I think those poor kids once confronted with the reality of the situation either realize their chances at 160k are low and thus don't take out 200k, or they continue along the line of thinking that they are a special snowflake who has overcome and will do so again in law school. But, the reality is that a lot of kids (poor and rich) don't think through the investment side of school since loans are handed out willy nilly.

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

[Stringer Bell]

I agree that it wouldn't be a perfect correlation, but I think there is a correlation if you could somehow analyze the data.

I think it would really depend on how you slice the data up. People from "better" backgrounds are going to be less likely to pay sticker at a T4 because those types of people are going to be more likely to research the information and probably understand cost/benefit better.

But if you are talking about people that have good entrance numbers I think it's different. A few years ago if I had decided to go to law school I would have gone PT while I worked or I would have gone to a school where I got alot of money. After working for a while and seeing how important getting your foot in the right door is to your career advancement, I'm alot more willing to pay more money for a better shot at getting my foot in those right doors. I think people that come from money have that mentality as well.

[bk1]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

[Stringer Bell]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

Right. Poor kids are more likely to get the advice "go to college, college grads make on average 20k more than non college grads" without the caveat that there is alot more to it than that.

[firemed]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

That is what I was taught too: Go to college, get a degree and job options will just open up for you like effing magic. Doesn't matter what you major in, as long as you enjoy it. And remember employers don't care about your grades, only that you have the degree.

It wasn't true then, it is less true now. But that isn't what people are teaching their children.

Now me, I am telling my kid to get a professional degree or a PhD. A liberal arts degree is useless. Which I actually think is kind of sad, because I think liberal arts are kind of the foundation of a well educated society.

[AreJay711]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

True. I worked contruction and EVERY person told me to keep going to school no matter what it cost.

Also, intellectual folk go to school aut of a love of learning rather than for these droll "career prospects"

[aliarrow]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

Right. Poor kids are more likely to get the advice "go to college, college grads make on average 20k more than non college grads" without the caveat that there is alot more to it than that.

Heh, we got those crappy charts all the time in my high school showing different lifetime earnings.

Well as a poor kid gone liberal arts... It was just more about ambition. I was always advised to go into something more 'vocational' (ie nursing, engineering, etc), but it just never appealed due to the steadiness. This could very well be more caused by personality though (or an interaction between personality and SES). It just seemed like to be someone important one day you have to pick a liberal arts major, go to grad school, and go from there.

[rose711]

Wait, I though OP started this thread because everyone on this forum is a self-righteous uninformed snob? Does that cut through economic classes? (j/k)

[FlanAl]

What blows my mind is why poor kids would go to college and major in anything in the liberal arts.

Really? I mean I see it all the time that poor kids are constantly told that going to college, any college any major, is going to be amazingly helpful for you and find you a great job.

I don't find it surprising at all that they would major in liberal arts considering they think that college is a great investment no matter what.

That is what I was taught too: Go to college, get a degree and job options will just open up for you like effing magic. Doesn't matter what you major in, as long as you enjoy it. And remember employers don't care about your grades, only that you have the degree.

It wasn't true then, it is less true now. But that isn't what people are teaching their children.

Now me, I am telling my kid to get a professional degree or a PhD. A liberal arts degree is useless. Which I actually think is kind of sad, because I think liberal arts are kind of the foundation of a well educated society.

meh it used to be kinda true. out of people I know who graduated with rando liberal arts degrees in the early to mid 2000's all have rad corporate jobs. (we're talking religion, theater and anthro majors)

[romothesavior]

I understand what you're saying ali, but I just disagree that you can make any conclusions on how different socioeconomic groups on TLS feel about debt, because we know next to nothing about the background of the person on the other side of the computer screen. I think this entire conversation over the past 2 pages or so has been pretty stupid, even by TLS standards.

[aliarrow]

I understand what you're saying ali, but I just disagree that you can make any conclusions on how different socioeconomic groups on TLS feel about debt, because we know next to nothing about the background of the person on the other side of the computer screen. I think this entire conversation over the past 2 pages or so has been pretty stupid, even by TLS standards.

I just think there could be a correlation.
Correlations almost always have exceptions, so it won't apply to all people and situations.

I'm completely willing to drop it as it isn't anything I'm too vested in, it was just a 'random thought' type of post.

[firemed]

meh it used to be kinda true. out of people I know who graduated with rando liberal arts degrees in the early to mid 2000's all have rad corporate jobs. (we're talking religion, theater and anthro majors)

Yeah... but late 90s when I was doing it the first time, and now... not good advice. I think there are indeed times when there is an imbalance between worker supply and employer demand when any degree would do... but I think those come and go. If you get an actual useful degree though... well, you don't have to worry about whether or not the state of hiring is favorable to a random liberal arts degree.

[geoduck]

My name keeps getting mentioned but I can't hear you guys over the sound of benjamins fluttering down from the sky everywhere I go.

And judging from my posts in this thread, I'm apparently living in el barrio. ¿Desea unas naranjas?

[firemed]

My name keeps getting mentioned but I can't hear you guys over the sound of benjamins fluttering down from the sky everywhere I go.

And judging from my posts in this thread, I'm apparently living in el barrio. ¿Desea unas naranjas?

I had a response... but this is on-topic forums. Even if it was in spanish I would probably get punished.

But feel free to imagine what it was I typed.

[bk1]

My name keeps getting mentioned but I can't hear you guys over the sound of benjamins fluttering down from the sky everywhere I go.

And judging from my posts in this thread, I'm apparently living in el barrio. ¿Desea unas naranjas?

I feel like a bad Mexican/Puerto Rican because I can't understand that.