Are successful/smart/hardworking students subsidizing others Forum

[paul_m86]

You're either incredibly dumb or trolling to think that all the top 10%/LR peeps flock to biglaw. I'm going to go with the latter.

You're right. A lot at my school also gun for academia. I think that after you take biglaw and academia into account, comfortably less than 5% of people on my school's law review are aiming for public interest.

[tyro]

Seems like the OP is having trouble realizing that not everyone who goes into law is looking for a big private firm job in the beginning and then "settling" for PI as implied. This is just not true and pretty ridiculous.

[paul_m86]

Seems like the OP is having trouble realizing that not everyone who goes into law is looking for a big private firm job in the beginning and then "settling" for PI as implied. This is just not true and pretty ridiculous.

I was speaking generally. Some people do come in wanting public interest. I see a lot of these people getting good grades and then conveniently having a change of mind. I see a number of people coming in wanting biglaw. Then they get bad grades, and decide that they are being directed by some deity to pursue public interest. The people in the best shape are the ones who come in wanting public interest, get bad grades, and get to do public interest while acting like they were just PI-or-die this whole time.

I just think it's hilarious to hear some of the people who participated in OCI talk about how they didn't really want a biglaw job and are kind of glad they struck out so they can chase after their "true calling."

[20130312]

Jesus pretentious Christ.

ETA: just noticed that this is my 333rd post and I mentioned Jesus in it Coincidence?

[NinerFan]

Seems like the OP is having trouble realizing that not everyone who goes into law is looking for a big private firm job in the beginning and then "settling" for PI as implied. This is just not true and pretty ridiculous.

I was speaking generally. Some people do come in wanting public interest. I see a lot of these people getting good grades and then conveniently having a change of mind. I see a number of people coming in wanting biglaw. Then they get bad grades, and decide that they are being directed by some deity to pursue public interest. The people in the best shape are the ones who come in wanting public interest, get bad grades, and get to do public interest while acting like they were just PI-or-die this whole time.

I just think it's hilarious to hear some of the people who participated in OCI talk about how they didn't really want a biglaw job and are kind of glad they struck out so they can chase after their "true calling."

This is not necessarily untrue, but the point you're making with this thread if you're not trolling is lost on me.

[paul_m86]

Seems like the OP is having trouble realizing that not everyone who goes into law is looking for a big private firm job in the beginning and then "settling" for PI as implied. This is just not true and pretty ridiculous.

I was speaking generally. Some people do come in wanting public interest. I see a lot of these people getting good grades and then conveniently having a change of mind. I see a number of people coming in wanting biglaw. Then they get bad grades, and decide that they are being directed by some deity to pursue public interest. The people in the best shape are the ones who come in wanting public interest, get bad grades, and get to do public interest while acting like they were just PI-or-die this whole time.

I just think it's hilarious to hear some of the people who participated in OCI talk about how they didn't really want a biglaw job and are kind of glad they struck out so they can chase after their "true calling."

This is not necessarily untrue, but the point you're making with this thread if you're not trolling is lost on me.

Not trolling. Just overheard some of these people today and thought "ah well, don't worry about it, not like it hurts you." Then I started thinking that maybe it did.....

[BeenDidThat]

Yeah, I'm sure we'll feel really bad that maybe a week's paycheck per year will go to subsidizing our colleagues. Boo fucking hoo.

Oh, so you wouldn't mind if I took a paycheck or two of yours every year? Cool! I will make sure it goes to a charity ... or ... something.

And as noted before, a lot of those top performers are paying less than full price anywho.

At my school, the average scholarship for people getting biglaw might be $15-$20 year. Which means they are still going to be dealing with insane debt.

Yeah, that's what I said, shithead. Judging by your reasoning ability, I'm gonna have to ask you to go cry to your mom about striking out in OCI. "[You're] a winner, maaaan."

[tyro]

Seems like the OP is having trouble realizing that not everyone who goes into law is looking for a big private firm job in the beginning and then "settling" for PI as implied. This is just not true and pretty ridiculous.

I was speaking generally. Some people do come in wanting public interest. I see a lot of these people getting good grades and then conveniently having a change of mind. I see a number of people coming in wanting biglaw. Then they get bad grades, and decide that they are being directed by some deity to pursue public interest. The people in the best shape are the ones who come in wanting public interest, get bad grades, and get to do public interest while acting like they were just PI-or-die this whole time.

I just think it's hilarious to hear some of the people who participated in OCI talk about how they didn't really want a biglaw job and are kind of glad they struck out so they can chase after their "true calling."

Yeah there's totally a stereotype/stigma with law students who say they want to do PI and then end up going for the money. These same people might be the ones who then switch it up again and say they wanted PI all along. But let's not forget about those who actually wanted PI from the start and would rather forget about law altogether than go into private practice. I get what you're saying but it seems kind of douchey to say you're subsidizing others.

[paul_m86]

Yeah, I'm sure we'll feel really bad that maybe a week's paycheck per year will go to subsidizing our colleagues. Boo fucking hoo.

Oh, so you wouldn't mind if I took a paycheck or two of yours every year? Cool! I will make sure it goes to a charity ... or ... something.

And as noted before, a lot of those top performers are paying less than full price anywho.

At my school, the average scholarship for people getting biglaw might be $15-$20 year. Which means they are still going to be dealing with insane debt.

Yeah, that's what I said, shithead. Judging by your reasoning ability, I'm gonna have to ask you to go cry to your mom about striking out in OCI. "[You're] a winner, maaaan."

I don't understand what any of this means.

[IAFG]

One of my 3L friends struck out of biglaw, got DOJ for 2L summer and then perm offer. It makes me lol to think of the hardcore PI people she beat out.

[anonymcoffee]

...nice thread title btw *sarcasm*.

And you sure couldn't wait to share the news about your SA; too bad you're subsidizing me, sucker

[mrloblaw]

Thanks for subsidizing me, OP! It's nice to know that someone's making the big bucks so that I can continue sucking at lawl school and/or life.

[Anonymous User]

Top 10%, LR, substantial work history, and I did work my butt off. I interviewed at OCI because I started to freak out about money and felt I had to. No callbacks. When I asked the CSO if I was hideous or something I found out that several of the alumni interviewers who gave feedback to the office about candidates said that I was possibly the most "polished" student they interviewed, but they could tell from my resume (3 jobs all in the same area of law which is generally seen as public-interesty) that I would not be happy in biglaw. That is when I figured out I was just a really bad liar and didn't have a passion for mergers and acquisitions. I always wanted to do PI or government, but the whole "THERE ARE NO JERBBBBBSSSS!!!" freaked me out into trying OCI. Never again. That was the most painful month of my life.

[ToTransferOrNot]

heeeerrrrrp derp

[observationalist]

Oddly enough the subsidizing question is a problem, but it works the other way around and it deals with the front-end. Nearly all scholarship aid has shifted from need-based to merit-based, which means at virtually every law school the students who are paying the least for their education are the ones with the highest LSAT/gpa combos out of the bunch. Those same students attending on scholarship also tend to perform better once they're in school competing with students who have lower LSAT/gpa combos, meaning that for them the odds of good grades and therefore better job prospects are higher than the students paying sticker.

Add to that the enormous increases in base tuition over the last two decades and you start to see the problem. Those increases were at least in part based on each school's recognition that they needed more scholarship aid to pull in more students with higher LSATs/gpas and thus improve their U.S. News ranking and overall competitiveness.

So, yes, some students are effectively subsidizing the educations of others. But it's the ones who in the aggregate have lower chances at doing well who are footing the bill, while applicants who are best prepared to do well enough to net the few high-paying jobs still out there are also managing more comfortable debt loads.

(People are all over the map; hard workerss hustle to get off the WL and then end up on Law Review in V10 firms; people on scholly's assume they will do well and end up not working hard enough; law school grading based on timed exams at the end of the semester as an accurate sorting mechanism is highly problematic, etc. But the averages show that scholarship recipients tend to do better on average and end up with a larger share of the top jobs compared with non-scholarship recipients. And this has been largely made possible by upping the sticker price everyone else has to pay.)

[Mce252]

If only everyone would just be in the top ten percent, none of this subsidizing business would be going on. What the hell is wrong with these people?

[spondee]

You're really making two points, but unfortunately, you conflated them.

1. Students that pay sticker, then pay off their loans based on salary are subsidizing students who use LRAP or loan forgiveness, as well as some students on scholarship. In the abstract, this isn't all bad. You knew the deal going in; the scholarships are rewarding those who've previously performed well; and there's net societal benefit to sending good lawyers into low-paying public-sector jobs.

On the other hand, there may be a real subsidization problem in the federal loan structure. The student paying sticker at a T10 via loans, who then pays it off at a market-paying firm, is helping ensure the government's profits on the loan program—covering the costs of the student who takes out loans for sticker at a TTTT, then uses 25-year loan forgiveness while working some shitty non-legal job.

2. You seem to think that only lazy dumbs do PI. This is why everyone's pointing out how much of a douchebag you are.

[lawschoolgrapedme]

I'm sitting in class right now thinking about how smart I must be since I am going to a law firm and not PI. I'm really pissed that I am subsidizing half the class sitting in front of me.

[keg411]

heeeerrrrrp derp

TITCR

[headandshoulderos]

I'm sitting in class right now thinking about how smart I must be since I am going to a law firm and not PI. I'm really pissed that I am subsidizing half the class sitting in front of me.

im just pissed that im in class

[BruceWayne]

I'm still trying to figure out why the OP thinks that the people who aren't at the top of the class didn't work hard and put in a lot of time studying. Does he not understand the concept of a forced curve? I'm surprised more people haven't mentioned that. It's remarkable how many people really don't understand what a forced curve means. OP do you understand that being top 10 percent means that inevitably 90 percent of the class doesn't attain top 10 percent? Do you also understand that this setup means that even if you have 100 people who are absolutely brilliant only 10 will be able to attain top 10 percent? Was that explained to you when you enrolled in law school?

[rinkrat19]

2. You seem to think that only lazy dumbs do PI. This is why everyone's pointing out how much of a douchebag you are.

Nicely summed up.

[headandshoulderos]

I'm still trying to figure out why the OP thinks that the people who aren't at the top of the class didn't work hard and put in a lot of time studying. Does he not understand the concept of a forced curve? I'm surprised more people haven't mentioned that. It's remarkable how many people really don't understand what a forced curve means. OP do you understand that being top 10 percent means that inevitably 90 percent of the class doesn't attain top 10 percent? Do you also understand that this setup means that even if you have 100 people who are absolutely brilliant only 10 will be able to attain top 10 percent? Was that explained to you when you enrolled in law school?

ya but come on dude. there are no schools with 100 brilliant people. maybe yale or stanford. usually at least a good %age of the bottom are lazy or lazier or not as talented/smart.

[20130312]

ya but come on dude. there are no schools with 100 brilliant people. maybe yale or stanford. usually at least a good %age of the bottom are lazy or lazier or not as talented/smart.

Your argument is fallacious.

[headandshoulderos]

ya but come on dude. there are no schools with 100 brilliant people. maybe yale or stanford. usually at least a good %age of the bottom are lazy or lazier or not as talented/smart.

Your argument is fallacious.

Why? You really think everybody in law school is equivalent and exam produced rantings are arbitrary?