Top Law Schools

No, seriously, why? Also, why isn't there more variance in price relative to rank or purported quality?

ITT we learn about supply and demand

reasonabledoubt wrote:No, seriously, why? Also, why isn't there more variance in price relative to rank or purported quality?

it's heavily subsidized and loans are given out readily, and a lot of people want to go to law school for various reasons.

Why are they ALL expensive? that I can't give a great reason for, because there is definitely more demand for Stanford than say U of Santa Clara but the costs aren't as different as the disparity in ranking would suggest.

IB this thread gets retarded

kittenmittons wrote:IB this thread gets retarded

IBOP?

reasonabledoubt wrote: Also, why isn't there more variance in price relative to rank or purported quality?

because you can get the same federal loans (free money) for any school you choose to attend. Moreover, if you want to go to law school, and X Law School is the best school that will take you.. youll pay what they want with said free money.

kittenmittons wrote:IB this thread gets retarded

Waaaay too late.

because your earnings potential is so great after law school.

I wonder whats the average amount of threads reasonabledoubt creates each day? 5-8?

Feedback circuit where practicing requires licensing which requires a diploma and bar passage, thus restricting the number of lawyers thus driving up salaries in a market with relatively inelastic demand, thus schools can charge high prices because of high roi (for those who get jobs). Thanks to assymetry of salary info, students think they will get a good job and find the price justifiable on those grounds.

jack duluoz wrote:because your earnings potential is so great after law school.

There should be an abysmal economy discount then. Right now I suggest to the pope of the academic universe that he/she should make law school 2,500/year, out of state, of course.

But seriously - have law profs experienced any reduced salaries/etc. or were they relatively incubated from the economy?

Someone suggested in another thread that some law profs make 300k - that's disguisting if true.

reasonabledoubt wrote:

jack duluoz wrote:because your earnings potential is so great after law school.

There should be an abysmal economy discount then. Right now I suggest to the pope of the academic universe that he/she should make law school 2,500/year, out of state, of course.

But seriously - have law profs experienced any reduced salaries/etc. or were they relatively incubated from the economy?

Someone suggested in another thread that some law profs make 300k - that's disguisting if true.

shitty economy increased application #'s, increasing demand of law schools.

Na_Swatch wrote:I wonder whats the average amount of threads reasonabledoubt creates each day? 5-8?

Incredibly efficient in the midst of brokering high-profile, multi-million dollar business deals.

Borhas wrote:

reasonabledoubt wrote:

jack duluoz wrote:because your earnings potential is so great after law school.

There should be an abysmal economy discount then. Right now I suggest to the pope of the academic universe that he/she should make law school 2,500/year, out of state, of course.

But seriously - have law profs experienced any reduced salaries/etc. or were they relatively incubated from the economy?

Someone suggested in another thread that some law profs make 300k - that's disguisting if true.

shitty economy increased application #'s, increasing demand of law schools.

Which is essentially being subsidized by US Gov in the form of federal loans which ensures most will start off their careers with six-figure debt.

dutchstriker wrote:

Na_Swatch wrote:I wonder whats the average amount of threads reasonabledoubt creates each day? 5-8?

Incredibly efficient in the midst of brokering high-profile, multi-million dollar business deals.

The boom is over buddy.... why do you think i'm LS bound?

reasonabledoubt wrote:
Which is essentially being subsidized by US Gov in the form of federal loans which ensures most will start off their careers with six-figure debt.

IBR

so is it safe to assume it doesn't require 40k a year to educate someone? are the UC schools raising prices to kick money back to the UGs?

twert wrote:so is it safe to assume it doesn't require 40k a year to educate someone? are the UC schools raising prices to kick money back to the UGs?

No. The state of California poured money into the UCs.

Now that the economy in CA is in such bad shape, they are cutting back UC funding.

On a different note, there was a study published in the last 4 months that showed the high cost of tuition is due to the fact that the schools are trying to increase their rank on US News and not because of anything else (such as accreditation).

But, as others have already stated, there are plenty of people wanting to go to law school and all of the "better" law schools only have so many seats before people will have to look at a not-so-good law school versus not going.

That would assume, however, that everyone keeps up with US News.

And they don't.

Probably around 50%+ of people trying to go to law school don't care about rankings and just look at what is nearby or what is prestigious (in the area) and relatively close.

Aberzombie1892 wrote:

twert wrote:so is it safe to assume it doesn't require 40k a year to educate someone? are the UC schools raising prices to kick money back to the UGs?

No. The state of California poured money into the UCs.

Now that the economy in CA is in such bad shape, they are cutting back UC funding.

On a different note, there was a study published in the last 4 months that showed the high cost of tuition is due to the fact that the schools are trying to increase their rank on US News and not because of anything else (such as accreditation).

But, as others have already stated, there are plenty of people wanting to go to law school and all of the "better" law schools only have so many seats before people will have to look at a not-so-good law school versus not going.

That would assume, however, that everyone keeps up with US News.

And they don't.

Probably around 50%+ of people trying to go to law school don't care about rankings and just look at what is nearby or what is prestigious (in the area) and relatively close.

Where did you get these numbers? I guarantee it is not that high. If you go to school and dont care whatsoever about rankings, you are a small minority.

ogman05 wrote:

Aberzombie1892 wrote:

twert wrote:so is it safe to assume it doesn't require 40k a year to educate someone? are the UC schools raising prices to kick money back to the UGs?

No. The state of California poured money into the UCs.

Now that the economy in CA is in such bad shape, they are cutting back UC funding.

On a different note, there was a study published in the last 4 months that showed the high cost of tuition is due to the fact that the schools are trying to increase their rank on US News and not because of anything else (such as accreditation).

But, as others have already stated, there are plenty of people wanting to go to law school and all of the "better" law schools only have so many seats before people will have to look at a not-so-good law school versus not going.

That would assume, however, that everyone keeps up with US News.

And they don't.

Probably around 50%+ of people trying to go to law school don't care about rankings and just look at what is nearby or what is prestigious (in the area) and relatively close.

Where did you get these numbers? I guarantee it is not that high. If you go to school and dont care whatsoever about rankings, you are a small minority.

Anti Asian trolling.

Because people like to take your money.

vtoodler wrote:Because people like to take your money.

Yo mamma.

Because they know how many people will apply regardless of cost. They know that any given year well over twice as many people will apply than will be admitted, and then that number will be cut down significantly as well. If Pizza Hut knew that there were going to be 5 people fighting over every pizza they make, they would charge a shitload for pizza.

The OP is getting hammered, but this is actually a very interesting question... that can be answered either in a sentence or a thesis, depending on how far you want to get into the sticky icky.

scionb4 wrote:Because they know how many people will apply regardless of cost. They know that any given year well over twice as many people will apply than will be admitted, and then that number will be cut down significantly as well. If Pizza Hut knew that there were going to be 5 people fighting over every pizza they make, they would charge a shitload for pizza.

Yes well in a (supposed) free market, another pizza joint would notice this dynamic and create a better pizza with better ingredients, Pappa Johns. (send me the royalty check @ vtoodler's mom's house, thx) But seriously, I was going to add that they'd sell it for a lower price. Pizza hut might then attempt to justify it's higher price/profit margin by buying it's place in some manipulated ranking publication like US News and World Pizza Report. Yale, I mean, Pizza Hut would eventually be found out as imposters trying to sell inferior pizza at an inflated price through the guise of inflated rankings; an educated public would then start pouring into the equal-if-not-better quality pizza joints out there which charge far less. Alas, this doesn't take into account the seductive variable of "prestige." Academia is not a rational market and it certainly doesn't follow free-market laws. Much in the same way my wife tries to explain the value of $500 women's shoes when all I see is $5 dollars of raw material and the manufactured illusion of "status" and so forth, schools sell the public the same illusion, and much like market dynamics.... reality doesn't matter as much as how compelling the illusion is. Perception becomes reality. Give me $200k - maybe you'll have a job offer afterwards, or maybe you just ate some shitty pizza.