Top Law Schools

Excellent article with some great points:

http://www.openforum.com/articles/dont- ... nf-SBdaily

Accompanied by an excellent video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4M98x-FLp7E

Okay, seriously.... I sort of think you're an idiot for believing that the only reason to do anything in life is money. Perhaps, and I'm just throwing this out there, some people would like to pursue further education because they would like to be educated. I've considered the Ph.D route. Will I get rich? No. Will I survive? Yeah, probably.

But really, everyone with 2 ounces of sense knows everything that you've ever said already (except for the 50% that's total nonsense) so maybe you should go to the local high school and talk to the kids there that really don't know what's going on instead of bothering people who already know graduate school is a gamble, but really want to study law regardless of monetary gain. Do you really have nothing better to do than seek attention on a forum by starting fights? Go volunteer somewhere. Do something that could actually impact someone's life in a positive way, because here? You have no chance to do so.

Plus, everyone knows sex is the only reason people do anything. It's science. Anyone who can have sex without money doesn't need it.

Humanities are for people afraid of adult life

/cower

Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

TurtlesAllTheWayDown wrote:Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

I'd rather hire a GED graduate with 7 years of work experience and real life practical skills, then a JD who's spent 7 years and 150k and learned essentially nothing that's applicable to the position he's applying for.

That was one of the most retarded opinion pieces I've ever read, and looking through some of this person's other writing indicates that this was not an isolated incident.

I don't think "article" means what you think it means.

Find opinion piece that matches your one-track beliefs
Post as credible article
Profit

I wish I had better words for what I want to say, but I'm going to just sink to the level of that article. It was stupid. It made a lot of conclusory statements and lacked nuance. Sure, some people fall into the categories it describes and it tells a story that applies to people we've all met. It tries to hedge with things like "and this isn't everyone" but I feel like it describes 5% of people as the majority and just reverses reality.

It also got itself all hung up on what I call "Death of a Salesman Syndrome" where people think you either have it or you don't. They think you can schmooze and rustle up business and that's what matters, like being a businessman is something you're born with. I think those times are, in many ways, over. The world is more technical and it's hard to do things without having advanced education. Small businesses are still things like concrete pouring but they're also things like software design. We're all aware of the failures of higher education but the article makes it sound like a large amount of educated people are falling prey to a vex that some Chronicle of Higher Education Article described. I'm thinking the articles general lack of substance is the reason it's published on Openforum as opposed to a more reputable website like my Aunt Sophia's angelfire page.

This reminds me why journalism is dead. At this point I'm certain that most of these don't go to grad school/law school/college articles are all copy pasted from the same set of articles.

I also love the whole lawyers are uncreative and are low performers. Why are they uncreative and low performers? It's because they had to be good at school and good at test taking!?!

She does make a good point in how you should look out when it comes to hiring someone with half a dozen graduate degrees, but she makes the typical sounds good but is a complete pile of nonsense argument that a lot of other people. For example, why dump $100,000 into b school when you could start your own business. Wait I know, because no bank would give them that kind of a line of credit! I could go on for awhile, but you get what I mean.

Nice trolling MTal.

MTal wrote:

TurtlesAllTheWayDown wrote:Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

I'd rather hire a GED graduate with 7 years of work experience and real life practical skills, then a JD who's spent 7 years and 150k and learned essentially nothing that's applicable to the position he's applying for.

It seems to me that the GED gets hired, fails to do the job because he is uneducated, and is then replaced by a JD. I dunno, but that works for me, so long as I get the job. Why would you want to hire two people? Just start with the JD next time. But hey, I'm not a business major or Walmart employee.

MTal wrote:

TurtlesAllTheWayDown wrote:Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

I'd rather hire a GED graduate with 7 years of work experience and real life practical skills, then a JD who's spent 7 years and 150k and learned essentially nothing that's applicable to the position he's applying for.

You obviously have not had a lot of GED graduates work for you. I have had that pleasure and although some were great people and hard workers, more often than not they were duds. Plus, somehow that GED grad would have to get work experience, which would difficult. Plus, what on earth do you think are "real life practical skills." Do you know how broad that is? Organization, ability to meet deadlines, communication skills, computer skills, leadership ability, charisma, critical thinking, I mean what do you want, someone that can change the oil on their car or do their own plumbing? Maybe some carpentry?

The author needs to spell check.

Darthmouth University? Yourelf? Entrpeneurship? Rsearch?

MTal wrote:

TurtlesAllTheWayDown wrote:Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

I'd rather hire a GED graduate with 7 years of work experience and real life practical skills, then a JD who's spent 7 years and 150k and learned essentially nothing that's applicable to the position he's applying for.

I'd rather fly around on a winged Pegasus than drive in my stupid car. I guess neither of us is really living in reality.

icedflames wrote:The author needs to spell check.

Darthmouth University? Yourelf? Entrpeneurship? Rsearch?

From the mouth of Vader himself

MTal wrote:

TurtlesAllTheWayDown wrote:Everyone knows the prized workers are the ones with their GEDs. They couldn't wait to join the workforce so they dropped out AND showed the initiative to go back and earn their equivalency degree.

Broad brushstrokes paint terribly unrealistic pictures.

I'd rather hire a GED graduate with 7 years of work experience and real life practical skills, then a JD who's spent 7 years and 150k and learned essentially nothing that's applicable to the position he's applying for.

Really? You'd hire someone to be a lawyer with 7 years of "work experience" and only a GED who never attended law school over someone who did? You're more of an idiot than I thought. I guess that's why you'll never be in a hiring position at all.

This person's various blogs are hilarious (although probably unintentionally). Read this entry (LinkRemoved); it's all about how she could barely handle a third-rate English graduate program, did poorly in her classes, plagiarized, took a job she was unqualified for that she got fired from, and just a whole lot of other weirdness.

joeshmo39 wrote:I wish I had better words for what I want to say, but I'm going to just sink to the level of that article. It was stupid. It made a lot of conclusory statements and lacked nuance. Sure, some people fall into the categories it describes and it tells a story that applies to people we've all met. It tries to hedge with things like "and this isn't everyone" but I feel like it describes 5% of people as the majority and just reverses reality.

It also got itself all hung up on what I call "Death of a Salesman Syndrome" where people think you either have it or you don't. They think you can schmooze and rustle up business and that's what matters, like being a businessman is something you're born with. I think those times are, in many ways, over. The world is more technical and it's hard to do things without having advanced education. Small businesses are still things like concrete pouring but they're also things like software design. We're all aware of the failures of higher education but the article makes it sound like a large amount of educated people are falling prey to a vex that some Chronicle of Higher Education Article described. I'm thinking the articles general lack of substance is the reason it's published on Openforum as opposed to a more reputable website like my Aunt Sophia's angelfire page.

Agreed. It's hard to take an article bashing English graduate students seriously when the author of the article litters it with comma splices and misspellings.

Real Madrid wrote:

joeshmo39 wrote:I wish I had better words for what I want to say, but I'm going to just sink to the level of that article. It was stupid. It made a lot of conclusory statements and lacked nuance. Sure, some people fall into the categories it describes and it tells a story that applies to people we've all met. It tries to hedge with things like "and this isn't everyone" but I feel like it describes 5% of people as the majority and just reverses reality.

It also got itself all hung up on what I call "Death of a Salesman Syndrome" where people think you either have it or you don't. They think you can schmooze and rustle up business and that's what matters, like being a businessman is something you're born with. I think those times are, in many ways, over. The world is more technical and it's hard to do things without having advanced education. Small businesses are still things like concrete pouring but they're also things like software design. We're all aware of the failures of higher education but the article makes it sound like a large amount of educated people are falling prey to a vex that some Chronicle of Higher Education Article described. I'm thinking the articles general lack of substance is the reason it's published on Openforum as opposed to a more reputable website like my Aunt Sophia's angelfire page.

Agreed. It's hard to take an article bashing English graduate students seriously when the author of the article litters it with comma splices and misspellings.

Well, what do you expect from a failed blogger? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penelope_Trunk

ETA: Apparently, Ms. Trunk thinks that my arts-related MA makes me an uncreative type. (And no, I didn't do it for improved job prospects, I did it because I am really interested in the field and want to have a master's-level knowledge of it. Grad school is not meant to be job training, though she apparently doesn't get that.)

Samara wrote:

Real Madrid wrote:

joeshmo39 wrote:(Above post)

Agreed. It's hard to take an article bashing English graduate students seriously when the author of the article litters it with comma splices and misspellings.

Well, what do you expect from a failed blogger? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penelope_Trunk

Penelope Trunk wrote:I have been fired a lot. Sometimes it has not mattered, like when my grandma fired me from her bookstore because I kept reading on the job. Sometimes it has been a bad scene with me shaking because I was so scared – like when I was fired at Ingram Micro for using the computer for non-work-related stuff (Yes, people got fired for that in 1995.)

But I checked in with myself at Yahoo and realized that I was fine. I was not going to cry. I was actually in problem-solving mode.

So I asked why I was being fired.

Maybe you are thinking it's because every week, 400 people leave comments on Yahoo saying how stupid I am. (And surely today's final column at Yahoo Finance will break records for she-is-so-stupid comments.) But that's not the reason my column was cancelled; Yahoo is about traffic, and according to Wikipedia, my column has some of the highest traffic on all of Yahoo.

I left the end about traffic so I didn't misrepresent her words, but it is what it is.

http://blog.penelopetrunk.com/2007/12/2 ... rom-yahoo/

I value her career advice.

She's actually really famous -- but I'd say most of her fame comes from writing controversial blog posts. Other than that, I don't think she was that successful in other ways. She's really not successful in the traditional sense. And law students/lawyers/0Ls are probably on the most "traditional" or "conservative" end of the career path. She's all about entrepreneurship, business, being controversial, etc. I mean, I don't even think she should give advice considering all her success is just from writing outlandish BS.

You may disagree with the contents of the article, but like it or not, this is the way hiring trends are going. Employers want someone with a proven track record of success in the real world, not someone with 7 years of worthless theoretical "training".

MTal wrote:You may disagree with the contents of the article, but like it or not, this is the way hiring trends are going. Employers want someone with a proven track record of success in the real world, not someone with 7 years of worthless theoretical "training".

That's like saying, "Hospitals are not interested in hiring doctors who went to business school and not medical school."

You apply for the job you're trained to do. Is anyone with a brain seriously going to law school to intentionally get a job outside of law?

Oh, and law school takes most people 3 years if full time. I don't think I'd hire anyone who spent seven years in law school either. How do you know what people accomplished in UG, and who are you to assume that if they chose law school they are unequipped to do something more "useful" in your eyes but decided against it?

MTal wrote:You may disagree with the contents of the article, but like it or not, this is the way hiring trends are going. Employers want someone with a proven track record of success in the real world, not someone with 7 years of worthless theoretical "training".

Exactly, I think we should follow your advice and get rid of high school. Who needs all that theoretical math or reading and writing.