I do sympathize and pretty much think how pretzel thinks. I'm just saying, NYT has no authority to talk about hypocrisy, and all schools, (specially the highest ranked ones because they've been around the longest),have done/do shady stuff. So I would advise to not stress too much on these issues for now, because a) things aren't as bad as they tend to seem, and b) because fucked up things are in all institutions. Not an excuse, just advice so you don't turn into a cynic/get depressed about life in America. But like I said, that's just my opinion.RictusErectus wrote:The op-ed is written by one of the affected workers -- of course it has an agenda! It's up to you how you feel about the issue at hand.Assasindowntheavenue wrote:Sort of hard to take an op-ed from NYT at face value and not think they have their own agenda. IMO.RictusErectus wrote:Hope you guys have been following up on this controversy at Harvard. Honestly reduces my respect for the university: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/24/opini ... .html?_r=1
Pretzel is right: the support -- on the ground and with the technical / legal consultation -- that many Harvard students have provided is heartening. If I get into the law school (BIG IF), I hope to do the same. Until then, here's a sad tweet:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/billhumphreyma/stat ... 8203238400[/tweet]
Edit: I wish I had a 100 posts already so that would load smoothly. Sorry.
Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017) Forum
- Assasindowntheavenue
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:45 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
-
- Posts: 884
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:41 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
.
Last edited by curry1 on Mon Feb 13, 2017 5:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Assasindowntheavenue
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:45 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
+1curry1 wrote:pretzeltime wrote:curry1 wrote:RictusErectus wrote:The op-ed is written by one of the affected workers -- of course it has an agenda! It's up to you how you feel about the issue at hand.Assasindowntheavenue wrote:Sort of hard to take an op-ed from NYT at face value and not think they have their own agenda. IMO.RictusErectus wrote:Hope you guys have been following up on this controversy at Harvard. Honestly reduces my respect for the university: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/24/opini ... .html?_r=1
Pretzel is right: the support -- on the ground and with the technical / legal consultation -- that many Harvard students have provided is heartening. If I get into the law school (BIG IF), I hope to do the same. Until then, here's a sad tweet:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/billhumphreyma/stat ... 8203238400[/tweet]
Edit: I wish I had a 100 posts already so that would load smoothly. Sorry.
Why should they be paid more? The median household income in the U.S. is right around $50,000 and many households have two wage-earners. They currently make around $32,000 and they indisputably work jobs that nearly any able-bodied person is capable of doing. They also have not taken on debt or the opportunity costs associated with higher education. To me, it seems like they are getting paid just about right. I bet most of these Harvard students (med etc.) will be singing a different tune when they are earning hundreds of thousands of dollars a year after more than a decade of higher ed and menial workers at their hospital firm etc. want higher salaries which will lower their earnings.
Curry, you clearly have a different perspective than we do. I doubt you'll change our minds or vice versa.
Before we go down a useless spiral of arguments, why don't we just call it a day.
And go back to the purpose of this thread -- wildly speculating and sometimes providing valid info about JS1s!!!!!!!
Yes! I think JS1's will begin to go out this week. Hopefully we all get calls so we can continue our arguments in Cambridge.
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I disagree with all of that, to each their own and so forth, but more importantly, I want to say that I read your handle as "Assad in the shadows" and IDK what that says about me but it sure is unsettlingAssasindowntheavenue wrote:
- Assasindowntheavenue
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:45 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Well my handle is actually a lyric from a Wilco song. So idk what that says about you either lol.pretzeltime wrote:I disagree with all of that, to each their own and so forth, but more importantly, I want to say that I read your handle as "Assad in the shadows" and IDK what that says about me but it sure is unsettlingAssasindowntheavenue wrote:
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Wilco is way chiller than Assad, cool.Assasindowntheavenue wrote:Well my handle is actually a lyric from a Wilco song. So idk what that says about you either lol.pretzeltime wrote:I disagree with all of that, to each their own and so forth, but more importantly, I want to say that I read your handle as "Assad in the shadows" and IDK what that says about me but it sure is unsettlingAssasindowntheavenue wrote:
- Assasindowntheavenue
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2016 6:45 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
+1. Something we can agree on lol.pretzeltime wrote:Wilco is way chiller than Assad, cool.Assasindowntheavenue wrote:Well my handle is actually a lyric from a Wilco song. So idk what that says about you either lol.pretzeltime wrote:I disagree with all of that, to each their own and so forth, but more importantly, I want to say that I read your handle as "Assad in the shadows" and IDK what that says about me but it sure is unsettlingAssasindowntheavenue wrote:
- forum_user
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:40 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
curry1 wrote: Note that the public interest lawyer likely has significant debt, the servicing of which brings her salary closer to the H dining worker. Most public interest lawyers didn't go to T14's with great LRAP'S or H. I know this is pointless, but I would argue that H is not forcing its workers to live in "functional poverty." They made many choices, i.e. having children like the worker in the article which constrain their lives. If they didn't have children or had a spouse who also worked they would not be living in such uncertainty.

eta health insurance covers birth control doesn't it? so eliminating barriers to health care would actually help to decrease children thereby decreasing poverty and solving a big chunk of your concerns. not to mention that most PI lawyers are well aware that they could probably make more money elsewhere, they chose that debt, etc. so if choice is a factor, let's apply it equally.
-
- Posts: 884
- Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:41 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I actually support a single payer system, given how ridiculously fucked up and expensive our healthcare system is. Sure, we all make choices, but H should not feel obligated to pay its dining workers extra to help pay for their healthcare costs when they are already being paid a generous wage. I would feel differently about this if the workers were getting paid like 8$ an hour and H was basically relying on the gov to pick up the tab for their healthcare costs when they inevitably would go to emergency rooms.forum_user wrote:curry1 wrote: Note that the public interest lawyer likely has significant debt, the servicing of which brings her salary closer to the H dining worker. Most public interest lawyers didn't go to T14's with great LRAP'S or H. I know this is pointless, but I would argue that H is not forcing its workers to live in "functional poverty." They made many choices, i.e. having children like the worker in the article which constrain their lives. If they didn't have children or had a spouse who also worked they would not be living in such uncertainty.
eta health insurance covers birth control doesn't it? so eliminating barriers to health care would actually help to decrease children thereby decreasing poverty and solving a big chunk of your concerns. not to mention that most PI lawyers are well aware that they could probably make more money elsewhere, they chose that debt, etc. so if choice is a factor, let's apply it equally.
- cherrygalore
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:13 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Hi guys, just saying hello. I'm applying to Harvard as well and just wanted to check in here!
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Email from Harvard JD Admissions
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
edited to be less triggering
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
edited to be less triggering
Last edited by pretzeltime on Tue Oct 25, 2016 11:29 am, edited 1 time in total.
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
hey ^__^cherrygalore wrote:Hi guys, just saying hello. I'm applying to Harvard as well and just wanted to check in here!
- proteinshake
- Posts: 4643
- Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 12:20 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
^__________^pretzeltime wrote:hey ^__^cherrygalore wrote:Hi guys, just saying hello. I'm applying to Harvard as well and just wanted to check in here!
I like that
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- forum_user
- Posts: 844
- Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2015 9:40 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
bruhpretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
- QuentonCassidy
- Posts: 592
- Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 3:58 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
All quiet on the Eastern front (no slots up).
Also the strike is tentatively over, workers voting on the deal today.
Also the strike is tentatively over, workers voting on the deal today.
-
- Posts: 206
- Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2016 8:10 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
Heart skipped a beat.pretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:25 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I received it in the beginning of Oct. Are we required to attend that session?Kaziende wrote:Heart skipped a beat.pretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
sorry, I shouldn't have done to you what H did to me. hehKaziende wrote:Heart skipped a beat.pretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
- pretzeltime
- Posts: 1993
- Joined: Sat May 07, 2016 6:57 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
There are several (many?) online info sessions, none of which you are required to attend.......NorthDragon wrote:I received it in the beginning of Oct. Are we required to attend that session?Kaziende wrote:Heart skipped a beat.pretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
- cherrygalore
- Posts: 474
- Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:13 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I attended one last week.pretzeltime wrote:There are several (many?) online info sessions, none of which you are required to attend.......NorthDragon wrote:I received it in the beginning of Oct. Are we required to attend that session?Kaziende wrote:Heart skipped a beat.pretzeltime wrote: Email from Harvard JD Admissions!!!!!!!!!
About an online information session.
Thanks guys
- Thelaw23
- Posts: 794
- Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 8:23 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I know the information sessions are a good way of decreasing the chances of being YP'ed by a school.
Unfortunately, I don't have that problem with Harvard.
Unfortunately, I don't have that problem with Harvard.
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
-
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:02 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
I am a non-URM with a GPA in the 3.6-3.7 range and an LSAT score in the 168-170 range with unexceptional softs. I'm talking myself into throwing away $115 to apply to Harvard just to see what happens. Stupid, or go for it?
- call-me-bubbles
- Posts: 320
- Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 11:46 am
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
.
Last edited by call-me-bubbles on Wed Jan 11, 2017 1:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 169
- Joined: Wed Jul 06, 2016 7:02 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
All it took was one comment to make me pull the trigger haha.call-me-bubbles wrote:Absolutely go for it. Your numbers aren't so wildly out of range that it's impossible, even though it may be unlikely according to myLSN and the folks on TLS, but I'm a big believer in at least throwing one's hat in the ring. For me, that $115 was probably a waste, and it may ultimately be for you, too, but I think it's always worth a try; you never know.cantyoloforever wrote:I am a non-URM with a GPA in the 3.6-3.7 range and an LSAT score in the 168-170 range with unexceptional softs. I'm talking myself into throwing away $115 to apply to Harvard just to see what happens. Stupid, or go for it?
-
- Posts: 352
- Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2016 1:37 pm
Re: Harvard Law c/o 2020 Applicants (2016-2017)
---
Last edited by potterotter on Tue Mar 14, 2017 2:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login