Post removed. Forum

whacka · Post by **whacka** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 1:47 pm

Post removed.

Clemenceau · Post by **Clemenceau** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:02 pm

Tons of the applicants on mylsn are kjd or had average work experience, so I don't know why it would be inaccurate for kjds

kingpin101 · Post by **kingpin101** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:04 pm

It might matter a bit for HYS+NU, but don't worry about it.

whacka · Post by **whacka** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 2:57 pm

Post removed.

benwyatt · Post by **benwyatt** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:23 pm

Post removed.

whacka · Post by **whacka** » Thu Jul 02, 2015 4:52 pm

Post removed.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:51 am

Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 12:55 am

Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.

Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:02 am

lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.

There's a solid chance you won't maximize your earning potential.

Plus it hurts life in general.

Definitely take at least 3 or 4 years off before law school. Your early 20s are far too precious.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:03 am

lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.

You don't maximize your earning potential when you strike out because you have 0 work experience unlike the vast majority of your classmates

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:05 am

lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.

Yeah, there are a lot of assumptions behind the idea that starting law school sooner will maximize your earning potential.

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:12 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
Yeah, there are a lot of assumptions behind the idea that starting law school sooner will maximize your earning potential.

In the case of a person who has a shot at schools like Stanford and Harvard based on their stats out of college, they can maximize their earning potential. But I'll concede that I shouldn't have put it in such concrete terms. They can maximize their earning potential. It's on them.

Mack.Hambleton wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
You don't maximize your earning potential when you strike out because you have 0 work experience unlike the vast majority of your classmates

Puhlease. You're not going to strike out at a T6/T14 unless you do poorly in terms of grades and/or are a terrible interviewer. Time off might help the former but I don't see it being a big help for the latter. And if he is a terrible interviewer, what job is he going to get out of college?

I'm not buying the fear mongering here. Also, the guy has some work experience.

BigZuck wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
There's a solid chance you won't maximize your earning potential.

Plus it hurts life in general.

Definitely take at least 3 or 4 years off before law school. Your early 20s are far too precious.

I don't know what the OP's stats are but if his chances at some T6 schools are around 50%, he'll likely be fine.

Every year off is every year that you're not earning lawyer money. If you have the stats to go K-JD at a T14 school with money and know you want to go to law school, might as well do it. I'm not saying it's the right move for everyone but it's the right move for some.

UpandDown97 · Post by **UpandDown97** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:18 am

lawman84 wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
Yeah, there are a lot of assumptions behind the idea that starting law school sooner will maximize your earning potential.
In the case of a person who has a shot at schools like Stanford and Harvard based on their stats out of college, they can maximize their earning potential. But I'll concede that I shouldn't have put it in such concrete terms. They can maximize their earning potential. It's on them.

Mack.Hambleton wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
You don't maximize your earning potential when you strike out because you have 0 work experience unlike the vast majority of your classmates
Puhlease. You're not going to strike out at a T6/T14 unless you do poorly in terms of grades and/or are a terrible interviewer. Time off might help the former but I don't see it being a big help for the latter. And if he is a terrible interviewer, what job is he going to get out of college?

I'm not buying the fear mongering here. Also, the guy has some work experience.

BigZuck wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Just dont go straight through..

It hurts for admissions, OCI, and life in general.
Not sure how maximizing your earning potential hurts life in general.
There's a solid chance you won't maximize your earning potential.

Plus it hurts life in general.

Definitely take at least 3 or 4 years off before law school. Your early 20s are far too precious.
I don't know what the OP's stats are but if his chances at some T6 schools are around 50%, he'll likely be fine.

Every year off is every year that you're not earning lawyer money. If you have the stats to go K-JD at a T14 school with money and know you want to go to law school, might as well do it. I'm not saying it's the right move for everyone but it's the right move for some.

Amen.

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:19 am

I think you're underestimating how easy it is to strike out and I think you're also ignoring the major issue with going to law school as a 22/23/24 year old.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:22 am

Also that it really doesn't matter when you do your 3-5 years of biglaw (if you're able to get it)

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:31 am

BigZuck wrote:I think you're underestimating how easy it is to strike out and I think you're also ignoring the major issue with going to law school as a 22/23/24 year old.

What's the major issue?

Maybe I am. Because I think it's pretty darn hard to not be able to land a job that pays well out of a T14 law school.(and in the case of the OP, likely not at a lower T14 if he really does have those high of odds at HSC...unless he's getting great scholarship money at that lower T14)

Mack.Hambleton wrote:Also that it really doesn't matter when you do your 3-5 years of biglaw (if you're able to get it)

Well, yes, it does matter. Because after you exit, you're still getting paid like a lawyer. Which is likely more than you're making straight out of undergrad.(but in certain cases, that might not be true...those are more the exceptions though)

BigZuck · Post by **BigZuck** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:34 am

BigZuck wrote:it hurts life in general.
...
Your early 20s are far too precious.

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:35 am

BigZuck wrote:
BigZuck wrote:it hurts life in general.
...
Your early 20s are far too precious.

What's so precious about them? I'm genuinely curious.(seriously, not being sarcastic)

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:36 am

Mack.Hambleton wrote:Also that it really doesn't matter when you do your 3-5 years of biglaw (if you're able to get it)

Yeah, exactly. I'm not going to say that no one should ever go K-JD; it's an individual decision and everyone has to make it for themselves. But (and I know I've said this in another thread) this maximization and "making lawyer money" idea assumes someone is going to go biglaw and stay biglaw, and to be brutally honest, most K-JDs are probably the least qualified among law school applicants to realistically assess what their long-term career is going to be. (I know that sounds super obnoxious, the condescending "you'll understand when you're older," but there's not much I can do about that.) You might strike out - it's unlikely, but possible. You might discover you hate law, or at least that you hate biglaw, which is wayyyyyyy more likely. That's all totally normal and if it turns out you don't want law (or biglaw) you have plenty of time to make a change, but it just doesn't make much sense to talk about the advantage to maximizing lawyer money when you have no idea where you'll be in 10 years. Besides, plenty of lawyers make $40-60k, so "lawyer" money doesn't really mean much.

Also, taking time off and actually working full-time at something definitely makes you a better interviewer. Plain old interviewing for jobs makes you a better interviewer.

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:40 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Also that it really doesn't matter when you do your 3-5 years of biglaw (if you're able to get it)
Yeah, exactly. I'm not going to say that no one should ever go K-JD; it's an individual decision and everyone has to make it for themselves. But (and I know I've said this in another thread) this maximization and "making lawyer money" idea assumes someone is going to go biglaw and stay biglaw, and to be brutally honest, most K-JDs are probably the least qualified among law school applicants to realistically assess what their long-term career is going to be. (I know that sounds super obnoxious, the condescending "you'll understand when you're older," but there's not much I can do about that.) You might strike out - it's unlikely, but possible. You might discover you hate law, or at least that you hate biglaw, which is wayyyyyyy more likely. That's all totally normal and if it turns out you don't want law (or biglaw) you have plenty of time to make a change, but it just doesn't make much sense to talk about the advantage to maximizing lawyer money when you have no idea where you'll be in 10 years. Besides, plenty of lawyers make $40-60k, so "lawyer" money doesn't really mean much.

Also, taking time off and actually working full-time at something definitely makes you a better interviewer. Plain old interviewing for jobs makes you a better interviewer.

Yea but when I say terrible, I don't really mean inexperienced. I mean one of those people that are terrible to the point of social awkwardness.

As far as liking or not liking biglaw goes, I just don't see how that changes as you age. So assuming that you'll spend the same amount of time in biglaw, I'm just saying that I think it's a safe assumption you'll make more after you exit biglaw than you will in the however many years you take off after undergrad. Is that true in every case? No. But I think it'll be true more often than not.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:43 am

Maybe at HYS aspies are the only ones striking out, but at lower T14 there are definitely many more people to account for who have no offers after OCI

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:45 am

Mack.Hambleton wrote:Maybe at HYS aspies are the only ones striking out, but at lower T14 there are definitely many more people to account for who have no offers after OCI

Many more than HYS but still not that high of a percentage. And even less of those people will strike out entirely.

A. Nony Mouse · Post by **A. Nony Mouse** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:46 am

lawman84 wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:Also, taking time off and actually working full-time at something definitely makes you a better interviewer. Plain old interviewing for jobs makes you a better interviewer.
Yea but when I say terrible, I don't really mean inexperienced. I mean one of those people that are terrible to the point of social awkwardness.

As far as liking or not liking biglaw goes, I just don't see how that changes as you age. So assuming that you'll spend the same amount of time in biglaw, I'm just saying that I think it's a safe assumption you'll make more after you exit biglaw than you will in the however many years you take off after undergrad. Is that true in every case? No. But I think it'll be true more often than not.

I think you're creating an artificially narrow category of "terrible interviewer," though. There are lots of reasons why a terrible interviewer is terrible, not limited to fundamental failure of social skills.

Mack.Hambleton · Post by **Mack.Hambleton** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:50 am

lawman84 wrote:
Mack.Hambleton wrote:Maybe at HYS aspies are the only ones striking out, but at lower T14 there are definitely many more people to account for who have no offers after OCI
Many more than HYS but still not that high of a percentage. And even less of those people will strike out entirely.

Five of the lower T14s have BL+FC rates in the 40s, 50s, and 60s. And no it's not all self selection.

lavarman84 · Post by **lavarman84** » Fri Jul 03, 2015 1:53 am

A. Nony Mouse wrote:
lawman84 wrote:
A. Nony Mouse wrote:Also, taking time off and actually working full-time at something definitely makes you a better interviewer. Plain old interviewing for jobs makes you a better interviewer.
Yea but when I say terrible, I don't really mean inexperienced. I mean one of those people that are terrible to the point of social awkwardness.

As far as liking or not liking biglaw goes, I just don't see how that changes as you age. So assuming that you'll spend the same amount of time in biglaw, I'm just saying that I think it's a safe assumption you'll make more after you exit biglaw than you will in the however many years you take off after undergrad. Is that true in every case? No. But I think it'll be true more often than not.
I think you're creating an artificially narrow category of "terrible interviewer," though. There are lots of reasons why a terrible interviewer is terrible, not limited to fundamental failure of social skills.

That's true. I am.

Regardless, my opinion in this case is that the general advice may not be the right advice for the OP. I checked the OP's stats, he has (or had) a near 4.0 GPA and a 170 LSAT. Not perfect numbers but numbers that will get him money in the T14 and likely accepted to one of CCN.

If he knows that he wants to go to law school, I don't see what taking a year or two off is going to do for him.(well, I do know what advantages it could give him...but I just don't think they're great enough for it to be worth it)

And frankly, if I had been around 15 months ago, you guys would have told me not to go the K-JD route. And you would have been right. That would have been the right advice for me. Now, it worked out for me. But I'm not about to advise the next kid in my shoes to do what I did.

But this isn't a guy in my shoes. He's actually in a good scenario. I just don't think he's gaining enough by sitting out a year or whatever to avoid being a K-JD.

I guess there's always the possibility the he finds his true calling in that year and avoids going into law which would have ended up making him miserable. But odds are that's not going to happen.(and he might end up liking being a lawyer)