More sad stories from our friends at JD underground Forum

[egrubs]

Fixed. I didn't see how to link to a specific post.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 21#p328136

[kiskadee321]

Fixed. I didn't see how to link to a specific post.

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 21#p328136

Sweet thanks.

[Living in America]

I'm so sick of reading these types of stories. Whiners.

[nellie06]

LMAOOOO...yea honestly she's stupid for trying to convice people not to go to law school...she admits she had no real idea why she wanted law she got into a good school, saw dollar signs and got lazy. Notice she never mentioned 'i busted my arse and still only got a 3.0'...I think she just did as little work as possible and expected firms to come begging for her because she went to a top 20 law school. You might get away with doing what she did at one of the holy trinity schools, but firms aren't stupid. If you're not willing to work hard for grades, chances are you won't want to work hard for a partner who is using you as a little cash cow haha. The last thing a firm needs is someone with an associate with an undue sense of entitlement!

[prettypithy]

(Just to catch up on my soon-to-be-trolling-JD-underground lingo...) What's an ID firm?

Insurance Defense. Refuting peoples insurance claims. Like there's a firm in New York that handles all of Geico's claims. Your job is to make sure people don't get paid. Pretty demoralizing stuff at 45k a year (in Manhattan).

[chris0805]

Don't think that law school is guarantee to a great career... but don't listen to J.D. underground either. It's a website made for people who hate themselves for getting a J.D. It's not a representative sample. Over 50 law schools have an employment rate of over 80 % at graduation. These are jobs that students accept before they graduate. These are not the "terrible" ID firms or the temp doc-review that graduates take because they are desperate....

Law school is not as good of an investment as many people think it is.... but it's definitely not nearly as bad as J.D. undergrounds presents it.

[Oklahoma Mike]

I think her biggest problem isn't graduating with a 3.0 (or just below) but that her first year was her worst. She's probably right that it's not really fair that in most cases only the first year grades count- but if she had one bad year followed by two good ones it's a very good possibility that she had under a 2.7 her first year.

she should totally out her school, by the way

Well, if she said top 30- it's not something top 25. She probably means when she started but could mean now. The possible schools seem to basically be: Boston College, Illinois, UNC, Emory, William & Mary, Fordham, and UW since those schools have been in the 26-30 range since around 2004.
I've know someone who went to BC who was in the exact same situation, and someone from Illinois who is currently in that situation. I'm guessing it's Fordham, Illinois or BC. Those schools place well if you are above the median for 1L grades, but they place largely in saturated markets and don't place well below the median. Emory, William & Mary, and UW all don't place as well as the others at the top of their class, but are in markets where they are bigger hitters and it seems students around the median would be able to find jobs- even if they weren't great jobs.

[ari20dal7]

I wonder if it is our friend from UIUC?

[Oklahoma Mike]

nah, I think the author is probably in a better spot than our UIUC friend, except for the debt. (Plus, isn't our friend still in her 3L?) OU certainly isn't a top 20 undergrad.

[aguyingeorgia]

Debt is such a scary word.

[egrubs]

"Explosive diarrhea" sounds far worse. "Debt" sounds way too tame for the horrors unleashed.

[ari20dal7]

Oh yeah, I forgot about that T20 UG.

[invertshadow]

..

[nellie06]

What exactly is this federal lrap? From law school websites, it seems like u need to be making 40k which is basically public defender money in order to qualify for lrap, which is stupid because gov't work is definitely still pi work, it just happens to be a more reasonable salary of about 75 to 85k. Are there wage ceilings for the lrap or is it simply do pi work for 7 years and your loans are forgiven? I really want to do gov't work after law school but i also want to make sure that I can get rid of my debt!

[kkhtlk]

i wonder if this person's standards were just too high. weren't there any smaller firms, or even government agencies out there willing to hire?

[The Agitator]

What exactly is this federal lrap? From law school websites, it seems like u need to be making 40k which is basically public defender money in order to qualify for lrap, which is stupid because gov't work is definitely still pi work, it just happens to be a more reasonable salary of about 75 to 85k. Are there wage ceilings for the lrap or is it simply do pi work for 7 years and your loans are forgiven? I really want to do gov't work after law school but i also want to make sure that I can get rid of my debt!

Deal with it. Why should taxpayers bail out your debt when you are making almost double the median U.S. family income?

[ari20dal7]

Deal with it. Why should taxpayers bail out your debt when you are making almost double the median U.S. family income?

One compelling reason might be to steer more talented people into government work. If government paid biglaw salaries, you can bet more than 10% of T14 classes would work in government. We can argue about whether a federal LRAP would actually have this effect, or even whether this is the intent of the legislation, but to say that there's just no reason to bail out the debt is misguided. People in a position to choose between government and biglaw have very good reasons to not work for the government, but the government has a good reason to want those folks. Frankly, I think applying a federal LRAP to most T3/T4 schools isn't a great public policy idea, but there is an argument to be made.

[khasra]

Deal with it. Why should taxpayers bail out your debt when you are making almost double the median U.S. family income?

You really can't come up with the reason on your own?

[nellie06]

What exactly is this federal lrap? From law school websites, it seems like u need to be making 40k which is basically public defender money in order to qualify for lrap, which is stupid because gov't work is definitely still pi work, it just happens to be a more reasonable salary of about 75 to 85k. Are there wage ceilings for the lrap or is it simply do pi work for 7 years and your loans are forgiven? I really want to do gov't work after law school but i also want to make sure that I can get rid of my debt!

Deal with it. Why should taxpayers bail out your debt when you are making almost double the median U.S. family income?

Oh, well. I guess I can always go into biglaw and make many more times the median us family income, instead of doing public interest work.

[CaptainDirtyBird]

LOUD NOISES...

[The Agitator]

One compelling reason might be to steer more talented people into government work. If government paid biglaw salaries, you can bet more than 10% of T14 classes would work in government. We can argue about whether a federal LRAP would actually have this effect, or even whether this is the intent of the legislation, but to say that there's just no reason to bail out the debt is misguided. People in a position to choose between government and biglaw have very good reasons to not work for the government, but the government has a good reason to want those folks. Frankly, I think applying a federal LRAP to most T3/T4 schools isn't a great public policy idea, but there is an argument to be made.

There is something to be said for debt repayment for Public Defenders making $30K/year; regardless, without getting into an extended argument, I think simply raising PD salaries would be a better option than instituting a national LRAP.

Besides, I was specifically referring to Nellie's example. No one should be having their debt repaid by someone else's money if they're making 80K. Make your loan payments, and live off 40K/year, like most Americans.

Oh, well. I guess I can always go into biglaw and make many more times the median us family income, instead of doing public interest work.

That's commendable that you want to work in PI, but why should someone else subsidize your career choice?

[nellie06]

Right, because most americans have to deal with the kind of debt I would be left with after law school. As opposed to having that debt because they want a new car, a house they can't afford and expensive clothing. Only in america would the average purveyor of luxury stores make 50k and yet spend over a thousand dollars on a consumer product. Sure plenty of people in america struggle to get by, and live within their means, but there are many who simply are not fiscally responsible, which is why the subprime market affected so many people. Greed took over reason. That's exactly why america has the lowest rate of savings of the major world powers.

Regardless, at least the top law schools make it somewhat feasible for people who still want to do good, and have a reasonable standard of living to do both. It shouldn't be that most of the government officials are already extremely well off, and thus cannot accurately represent the americans who don't make a lot of money. Maybe that's why our country has such a distinct socioeconomic chasm. Ever think of that?

[patentlaw]

Those $75-85K yearly salary government positions have no shortage of applicants. At that salary you're talking about DOJ, US Attorney's Offices, etc. Those positions are in high demand. I don't think there's any need to encourage more people to apply for the jobs. The people that I know who have entered US gov't service in those jobs are some of the best and brightest.

That's not to say a more generous LRAP is a bad idea, but I do feel like it's a bit odd to want to have the US taxpayer support people making 75-85K a year (coming from someone who will be making that shortly).

[The Agitator]

Right, because most americans have to deal with the kind of debt I would be left with after law school. As opposed to having that debt because they want a new car, a house they can't afford and expensive clothing. Only in america would the average purveyor of luxury stores make 50k and yet spend over a thousand dollars on a consumer product. Sure plenty of people in america struggle to get by, and live within their means, but there are many who simply are not fiscally responsible, which is why the subprime market affected so many people. Greed took over reason. That's exactly why america has the lowest rate of savings of the major world powers.

What does this have to do with anything? If you make 80K, the debt is still serviceable and your remaining income still puts you well above the US average. Why should other people be paying your loan payments if you are financially better off than most of them?

It shouldn't be that most of the government officials are already extremely well off, and thus cannot accurately represent the americans who don't make a lot of money. Maybe that's why our country has such a distinct socioeconomic chasm. Ever think of that?

So you have to be poor to represent poor people? Wouldn't that be an argument against an LRAP?

[nellie06]

One compelling reason might be to steer more talented people into government work. If government paid biglaw salaries, you can bet more than 10% of T14 classes would work in government. We can argue about whether a federal LRAP would actually have this effect, or even whether this is the intent of the legislation, but to say that there's just no reason to bail out the debt is misguided. People in a position to choose between government and biglaw have very good reasons to not work for the government, but the government has a good reason to want those folks. Frankly, I think applying a federal LRAP to most T3/T4 schools isn't a great public policy idea, but there is an argument to be made.

There is something to be said for debt repayment for Public Defenders making $30K/year; regardless, without getting into an extended argument, I think simply raising PD salaries would be a better option than instituting a national LRAP.

Besides, I was specifically referring to Nellie's example. No one should be having their debt repaid by someone else's money if they're making 80K. Make your loan payments, and live off 40K/year, like most Americans.

Oh, well. I guess I can always go into biglaw and make many more times the median us family income, instead of doing public interest work.

That's commendable that you want to work in PI, but why should someone else subsidize your career choice?

Your words make you sound future republican, who will benefit fun the tax breaks the wealthy get, while those who make less pay a higher proportion of their wages in taxes. As warren buffet stated, it is rather ludicrous that he, a billionaire pays less in taxes than his secretary does, when you consider the percentages each paid. I think if you maybe taxed the wealthy a little bit more, federal lrap could help people who are interested in pi work, but maybe come from middle class backgrounds and want to provide future generations what they had growing up. I don't think that's unreasonable.

I'm not asking for those who are struggling to pay. I'm asking for those who have exorbitant sums of money to put a few more drops in the tax collection bucket, so I don't have to necessarily become a biglaw cog and vote for presidents who will help me keep more of my bonus check.