New employment stats by ABA's new rule Forum
-
- Posts: 178
- Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 7:23 pm
New employment stats by ABA's new rule
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... nteractive
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... %3Darticle
We're screwed. Someone tell me to QUIT NOW.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... %3Darticle
We're screwed. Someone tell me to QUIT NOW.
-
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2012 2:07 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
this seems to reaffirm the "t14 or bust" sentiment. more motivation to not fuck up undergrad/lsats i guess :/
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
I remember reading this awhile ago. I decided to drop out that week. The actual numbers were far more convincing than anything I had read on TLS.
Then again, maybe it was just the final straw.
Then again, maybe it was just the final straw.
- SaintsTheMetal
- Posts: 429
- Joined: Mon Mar 05, 2012 5:08 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Is this actually new data, compared to what's on LST?
edit: nvm, seems to be exactly the same data... nothing new here
edit: nvm, seems to be exactly the same data... nothing new here
-
- Posts: 3896
- Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 11:07 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
So what is the alternate plan? Pursue your fame and riches in the exciting field of...?SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I remember reading this awhile ago. I decided to drop out that week. The actual numbers were far more convincing than anything I had read on TLS.
Then again, maybe it was just the final straw.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 893
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:23 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Taxidermyhaus wrote:So what is the alternate plan? Pursue your fame and riches in the exciting field of...?SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I remember reading this awhile ago. I decided to drop out that week. The actual numbers were far more convincing than anything I had read on TLS.
Then again, maybe it was just the final straw.
-
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:41 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
This has already been posted. The numbers are no different; there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric. I have learned nothing new. Thank you, and good day, sir.
-
- Posts: 1499
- Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 4:25 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
.
Last edited by nickb285 on Sun Jul 16, 2017 6:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:41 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Something tells me the latter is more likely.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
There's just a lot of "doom and gloom" numbers. A T1 like American university with 36% employed in jobs requiring a law degree? Half of schools having ~50% employed or less after nearly a year after graduation.JetsFan1990 wrote:This has already been posted. The numbers are no different; there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric. I have learned nothing new. Thank you, and good day, sir.
- rayiner
- Posts: 6145
- Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2008 11:43 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
9 months is ~4 months after bar passage for most people. E.g. graduate in May, bar 2 months later in July, bar results 5 months after graduation in October, data taken 9 months after graduation in February.nickb285 wrote:All the lower ranked schools are claiming it's related to bar passage. I would be curious to see what job numbers looked like six month after the bar exam, and see whether they have a point or they're just full of shit.
-
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:41 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
True, no doubt, but these numbers are generally the same as LST's. You're right, though; I would definitely agree these numbers paint a pretty grim picture.rayiner wrote:There's just a lot of "doom and gloom" numbers. A T1 like American university with 36% employed in jobs requiring a law degree? Half of schools having ~50% employed or less after nearly a year after graduation.JetsFan1990 wrote:This has already been posted. The numbers are no different; there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric. I have learned nothing new. Thank you, and good day, sir.
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Taxidermy is only worth it if you can land BigFur.mr.hands wrote:Taxidermyhaus wrote:So what is the alternate plan? Pursue your fame and riches in the exciting field of...?SchopenhauerFTW wrote:I remember reading this awhile ago. I decided to drop out that week. The actual numbers were far more convincing than anything I had read on TLS.
Then again, maybe it was just the final straw.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- 2014
- Posts: 6028
- Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 3:53 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
What category is missing from that chart? You would expect JD Required + JD Preferred + Any Job + Unemployed + Unknown would equal 100% but for many schools it is well off of it.
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Sun Oct 10, 2010 10:22 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Probably 'pursuing another degree'.2014 wrote:What category is missing from that chart? You would expect JD Required + JD Preferred + Any Job + Unemployed + Unknown would equal 100% but for many schools it is well off of it.
-
- Posts: 279
- Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 8:29 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Unemployed and not seeking a job? They have unemployed and seeking a job and indeterminable, but that doesn't necessarily equate to "not seeking employment".2014 wrote:What category is missing from that chart? You would expect JD Required + JD Preferred + Any Job + Unemployed + Unknown would equal 100% but for many schools it is well off of it.
- splitbrain
- Posts: 656
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
I knew I wanted to be an actor anyway.
--ImageRemoved--
--ImageRemoved--
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 56
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 2:14 pm
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
"Rhetoric" isn't a synonym for "reality," bro. The ugly truth is that, absent a guaranteed job, choosing to attend most of America's law schools without something close to a full scholarship (with no stips) is demonstrably fucking insane.there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric
Worse still, these numbers basically imply that admins and teachers at a substantial portion of America's law schools occupy the same moral plane as multi-level marketing hucksters, faith healers and snake-oil salesmen. They are value destroyers - a class of bourgeoisie parasites who exploit the naivete of young Americans and the broken system of federal education funding to enrich themselves while impoverishing the broader American economy. At best, their ethical status lies just slightly above that of the average drug dealer and most certainly below that of the average prostitute.
-
- Posts: 124
- Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 12:41 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
I mean yeah, you're right. But .. damn, that escalated quickly lol.Skump wrote:"Rhetoric" isn't a synonym for "reality," bro. The ugly truth is that, absent a guaranteed job, choosing to attend most of America's law schools without something close to a full scholarship (with no stips) is demonstrably fucking insane.there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric
Worse still, these numbers basically imply that admins and teachers at a substantial portion of America's law schools occupy the same moral plane as multi-level marketing hucksters, faith healers and snake-oil salesmen. They are value destroyers - a class of bourgeoisie parasites who exploit the naivete of young Americans and the broken system of federal education funding to enrich themselves while impoverishing the broader American economy. At best, their ethical status lies just slightly above that of the average drug dealer and most certainly below that of the average prostitute.
- ru2486
- Posts: 158
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 4:28 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Skump wrote:"Rhetoric" isn't a synonym for "reality," bro. The ugly truth is that, absent a guaranteed job, choosing to attend most of America's law schools without something close to a full scholarship (with no stips) is demonstrably fucking insane.there's just a lot of "doom and gloom" rhetoric
Worse still, these numbers basically imply that admins and teachers at a substantial portion of America's law schools occupy the same moral plane as multi-level marketing hucksters, faith healers and snake-oil salesmen. They are value destroyers - a class of bourgeoisie parasites who exploit the naivete of young Americans and the broken system of federal education funding to enrich themselves while impoverishing the broader American economy. At best, their ethical status lies just slightly above that of the average drug dealer and most certainly below that of the average prostitute.
i only object to your use of "bourgeoisie" [noun] when you meant to use "bourgeois" [adjective]
-
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 12:10 am
Re: New employment stats by ABA's new rule
Those numbers look the same as the percentages i'm figuring using the new ABA data.
They are a #%#$@ of a lot better than how many of us found jobs from undergrad at one of the two peaks of the economic crash. How is 50/50 bad exactly?
They are a #%#$@ of a lot better than how many of us found jobs from undergrad at one of the two peaks of the economic crash. How is 50/50 bad exactly?
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login