Do not attend TJSL Forum

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
shoeshine

Silver
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 10:58 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by shoeshine » Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:33 am

flcath wrote: Okay, for the purposes of this post, I'll accept the fiction that TJSL students chose to become TJSL students on the basis of an informed, rational choice.

I'm fine with them paying out of pocket for to go to TJSL. I'm even fine with them securing a private loan from a lender willing to take the risk on them (banks would do it for an HYS student; do you think they'd do it for a TJSL kid?). But why the hell is the gov't offering this person a loan that (1) will be destructive, on average, to the student, (2) will be destructive to *all* students, since they will have to compete--directly or indirectly--with that (artificially created) student, (3) will be destructive to the legal profession and its clients, since it dilutes the quality of the profession, and (4) will be destructive to the taxpayers who suffer when the student defaults?

Why not offer kids gov't loans for Lamborghinis, using the same logic of "oh, well they knew the risks of going into debt for a $200,000 car on a $30K salary, so who are we to tell them they can't do it?"
First of all I want to say that I actually agree with you. I hate the idea of the government backing education loans especially when they go to for-profit universities (University of Phoenix, Full Sail University, etc.).

However, I disagree that it harms the profession or dilutes the quality of the lawyer. The reason the ABA allows TTTs (instead of going the route of the MD schools you often post about) is because they want broad access to legal services. I am not sure if they have truly increased the access to legal services but I can guarantee you that if you shut down all the TTTs tomorrow there would be a shortage of legal services in the next decade that would dwarf anything the medical profession has ever seen. If the TTTs aren't giving broader access to legal services they are at least holding the amount of access steady.

Second, I don't necessarily think that attending a higher ranked school makes you a better lawyer. Most lawyers agree the things you do in law school and on the LSAT have no direct correlation to your success at actually practicing law. And then there is the study that reported that non-t14 grads were actually making partner at much higher rates then their elite school counterparts. Source: http://www-source.abajournal.com/news/a ... lower-tier

The part about it possibly being destructive to students and tax payers i agree with. If people want to take risks on education it should be with their own money or financed privately. However, implementing a change like that would have to come in the form of larger educations finance reform which is much bigger than a few TTT law schools.

User avatar
BarcaCrossesTheAlps

Bronze
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:43 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by BarcaCrossesTheAlps » Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:50 am

The ABA? They will accredit anything. This provides false legitimacy.

The idiots who want to go to garbage schools suck blood from the US treasury because they are allowed to do so. So, the fed gives money for accredited schools. Get accredited? No prob! Probably as difficult as passing a McDonald's food inspection.

Vampires, I tell ya! And stupid ones at that. Who in the hell would take out enough money to buy a house when all the fucking evidence in the world points to $40K a year job? Only an overconfident douche bag who desperately needs the advice of this board, whether they want it or not. The vicious cycle continues.... dumbasses are siphoning money to fund their daydreams and further the decline of Western Civilization! AAARRRGGGHHH!!! :shock:

User avatar
Gail

Silver
Posts: 977
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:11 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Gail » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:18 am

Disgusting and blatant Alexander Hamilton trolling.

Image

User avatar
Gail

Silver
Posts: 977
Joined: Thu Nov 10, 2011 11:11 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Gail » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:20 am

BarcaCrossesTheAlps wrote:The ABA? They will accredit anything. This provides false legitimacy.

The idiots who want to go to garbage schools suck blood from the US treasury because they are allowed to do so. So, the fed gives money for accredited schools. Get accredited? No prob! Probably as difficult as passing a McDonald's food inspection.

Vampires, I tell ya! And stupid ones at that. Who in the hell would take out enough money to buy a house when all the fucking evidence in the world points to $40K a year job? Only an overconfident douche bag who desperately needs the advice of this board, whether they want it or not. The vicious cycle continues.... dumbasses are siphoning money to fund their daydreams and further the decline of Western Civilization! AAARRRGGGHHH!!! :shock:
:shock:

In 1990, maybe.

User avatar
vpintz

Silver
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2011 2:51 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by vpintz » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:29 am

Gail wrote:Disgusting and blatant Alexander Hamilton trolling.

Image
lol'ed. I see what you did thar.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


timbs4339

Gold
Posts: 2777
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2011 12:19 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by timbs4339 » Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:26 am

shoeshine wrote:
flcath wrote: Okay, for the purposes of this post, I'll accept the fiction that TJSL students chose to become TJSL students on the basis of an informed, rational choice.

I'm fine with them paying out of pocket for to go to TJSL. I'm even fine with them securing a private loan from a lender willing to take the risk on them (banks would do it for an HYS student; do you think they'd do it for a TJSL kid?). But why the hell is the gov't offering this person a loan that (1) will be destructive, on average, to the student, (2) will be destructive to *all* students, since they will have to compete--directly or indirectly--with that (artificially created) student, (3) will be destructive to the legal profession and its clients, since it dilutes the quality of the profession, and (4) will be destructive to the taxpayers who suffer when the student defaults?

Why not offer kids gov't loans for Lamborghinis, using the same logic of "oh, well they knew the risks of going into debt for a $200,000 car on a $30K salary, so who are we to tell them they can't do it?"
First of all I want to say that I actually agree with you. I hate the idea of the government backing education loans especially when they go to for-profit universities (University of Phoenix, Full Sail University, etc.).

However, I disagree that it harms the profession or dilutes the quality of the lawyer. The reason the ABA allows TTTs (instead of going the route of the MD schools you often post about) is because they want broad access to legal services. I am not sure if they have truly increased the access to legal services but I can guarantee you that if you shut down all the TTTs tomorrow there would be a shortage of legal services in the next decade that would dwarf anything the medical profession has ever seen. If the TTTs aren't giving broader access to legal services they are at least holding the amount of access steady.

Second, I don't necessarily think that attending a higher ranked school makes you a better lawyer. Most lawyers agree the things you do in law school and on the LSAT have no direct correlation to your success at actually practicing law. And then there is the study that reported that non-t14 grads were actually making partner at much higher rates then their elite school counterparts. Source: http://www-source.abajournal.com/news/a ... lower-tier

The part about it possibly being destructive to students and tax payers i agree with. If people want to take risks on education it should be with their own money or financed privately. However, implementing a change like that would have to come in the form of larger educations finance reform which is much bigger than a few TTT law schools.
1) There is a shortage of legal services not because there are not enough lawyers but because there are not enough clients who can pay lawyers. Put it another way, the market for clients who can pay seeking lawyers is pretty damn good. The market for clients who can't pay does not depend on the "free market" but on how much government intervention is involved- does the government see access to decent criminal and civil legal services as a fundamental right? This determines how much funding is available for legal aid, etc.

Much of the demand for legal services is a demand for lawyers at $0 or much lower than it takes to run a practice and support yourself. I fail to see how dumping people with higher startup costs (because of 150K of debt) on the market is going to change this. This just makes it more likely they are going to take the first decent paying non-law job to start paying down the debt.

2) The oversupply of grads hurts the profession because of the massive PR hit we're taking, both directly and indirectly. People are slowly losing faith that law is a gateway to an upper-middle class life. Now it's just another fucking job, and one you have to incur 100K in costs to get. Recent law grads are living with their parents, working for 12/hr, working retail or food services, working for free. The word is getting out there, both through basic observation and articles in the NYT and other national media.

What protects all lawyers from price competition is, at the end of the day, the reputation of the profession for self-policing. That's what allows unauthorized practice laws to stand. The ABA and state bars have lost all control of law schools and if you don't think this isn't going to translate into less respect for the profession overall you're dreaming.

3) The above doesn't even begin to touch on the effects to the taxpayer and society in the form of outstanding student loan debt that will drag down the economy. Law students regularly graduate with 100K or 150K in debt, at the higher end of the spectrum. Consigning people who are of above-average intelligence to 150K in debt peonage in their mid-twenties is bad social policy. TJSL is one of the highest ranked schools in terms of average debt load, IIRC.

In short: anyone who lived through the recession should understand implicitly that letting people make stupid financial decisions as a matter of course will blowback on all of us in the end. Like the above poster said I really don't care how we solve the problem. Hell, keep TJSL and all the 200 ABA schools and have them all slash class sizes proportionate to their job placement. Just solve the fucking problem before it buries us all.
Last edited by timbs4339 on Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
flem

Diamond
Posts: 12882
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by flem » Mon Apr 09, 2012 9:28 am

Lawl Shcool wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
So... you transferred. This is what you said in the other thread:
Why does that matter?
Fucking LOL

EdgarWinter

Bronze
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 7:47 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by EdgarWinter » Mon Apr 09, 2012 11:20 am

.
Last edited by EdgarWinter on Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BarcaCrossesTheAlps

Bronze
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:43 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by BarcaCrossesTheAlps » Mon Apr 09, 2012 11:39 am

Gail wrote:
BarcaCrossesTheAlps wrote:The ABA? They will accredit anything. This provides false legitimacy.

The idiots who want to go to garbage schools suck blood from the US treasury because they are allowed to do so. So, the fed gives money for accredited schools. Get accredited? No prob! Probably as difficult as passing a McDonald's food inspection.

Vampires, I tell ya! And stupid ones at that. Who in the hell would take out enough money to buy a house when all the fucking evidence in the world points to $40K a year job? Only an overconfident douche bag who desperately needs the advice of this board, whether they want it or not. The vicious cycle continues.... dumbasses are siphoning money to fund their daydreams and further the decline of Western Civilization! AAARRRGGGHHH!!! :shock:
:shock:

In 1990, maybe.
Heh.

Too many kids take out 150K to go to TTT and TTTT schools. :roll:

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


User avatar
BarcaCrossesTheAlps

Bronze
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:43 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by BarcaCrossesTheAlps » Mon Apr 09, 2012 11:50 am

Gail wrote:Disgusting and blatant Alexander Hamilton trolling.

Image
Confusing rights and privileges? Maybe you are just conflating?

User avatar
splitbrain

Silver
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by splitbrain » Mon Apr 09, 2012 12:21 pm

tfleming09 wrote:
Lawl Shcool wrote:
Lord Randolph McDuff wrote:
So... you transferred. This is what you said in the other thread:
Why does that matter?
Fucking LOL
Saw that and lol'd too. That poster can't honestly tell the difference between saying "I went to TJSL and now work in biglaw" vs "I transferred out of TJSL to a top 10 school and now work in biglaw". Eesh.

User avatar
twenty

Gold
Posts: 3189
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2012 1:17 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by twenty » Mon Apr 09, 2012 1:03 pm

The good news is, everyone who went to TJSL was in the top 5% of their class. So it's totally viable to take out tons of debt to go to a TTT school, since after all, you'll basically be a shoe-in at BigLaw.

Brassica7

Bronze
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 1:06 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Brassica7 » Mon Apr 09, 2012 1:31 pm

shoeshine wrote:TBF: Law school in general is a bad/risky investment.

TJLS is just at the riskiest end of the spectrum. It is the C grade junk bonds of the law school market (think of HYS as AAA+). So someone with a low appetite for risk should not buy (attend) the riskiest investment (school). However, that doesn't mean that there aren't people out there that want to undertake the risk of going to a school like TJLS. Its entire existence is a function of the market place. There are some people that want to go to law school but can't achieve the grades necessary to attend a T1. As long as they understand the risks I think they should be allowed and possibly encouraged to go.

I agree that, like any investment, TJLS should have to report accurate numbers so that students (investors) can make wise decisions. A few years ago I would have said that the information that people were getting about TJLS was completely false and they were border line performing fraud. However, now the tables have turned and there is more negative information out there about TJLS than positive. If you don't believe me just Google "Thomas Jefferson Law School" and look at the results on the first page. Between Paul Campos, NYT Articles, Scam Blogs, Threads on TLS, and Abovethelaw there is a ton of information available about the bar passage rates and employment prospects of TJLS. Any student who understands this information and still decides to attend is doing it at their own risk and we should not judge them for their decision.

I actually know someone who attends TJLS (which is more than the other people in this thread can say). She claims that most of the people in her class (1Ls) understood the job prospects coming into TJLS. Everyone has their own plan about what to do. Some people are gunning. Others plan on relying on family connections and others want to pursue things outside of law.

The point is that it is unfair to assume that all of the people choosing to attend TJLS aren't aware of the job prospects before entering. And if they are aware of that then they have made an informed decision that we really have no business judging them for. It is sort of elitist to deny people access to the practice of law based on our perceptions about whether they are making a good financial choice.


I disagree with most of this.

First, the analogy is misleading. Junk bonds are high risk investments, but also command a high rate of return. They are therefore reasonable investments for people willing to take on substantial risk for the opportunity to grow their investments quickly. TJ is very high risk, but also low reward. Winning at TJ means making far less money/having fewer career and geographic options than those provided by the AAA-equivalent schools. TJ is both high risk and low return. Such investments do not exist naturally in a free marketplace, and are not similar to junk bonds.

Second, the government is involved in these risky investments (attending a school like TJ) because it backs the loans. It shouldn't be. If people want to invest their own savings to attend TJ (or could find a private lender to loan the money, with some process for discharging the loans in bankruptcy), then fine. The government shouldn't give people money to speculate in the stock/bond markets, and neither should it support students attending law schools where most students will never have the chance to work as attorneys.

The free-market apparatus is broken because the government gives students tuition checks without the risk/reward calculation that a rational lender would make. This is not the case with junk bond investors. If TJ was completely open about the job opportunities from its school (posting prominently on its website/mailings that most of its students never get jobs as attorneys) then I might be okay with it existing if people still wanted to attend.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


User avatar
Tom Joad

Gold
Posts: 4526
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:56 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Tom Joad » Mon Apr 09, 2012 2:03 pm

Would people please refrain from referring to Thomas Jefferson as TJ. I don't want to be confused with that scam.

User avatar
splitbrain

Silver
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by splitbrain » Mon Apr 09, 2012 2:07 pm

Tom Joad wrote:Would people please refrain from referring to Thomas Jefferson as TJ. I don't want to be confused with that scam.
I thought we were talking about Tijuana.

User avatar
TaipeiMort

Silver
Posts: 869
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by TaipeiMort » Mon Apr 09, 2012 3:31 pm

splitbrain wrote:
Tom Joad wrote:Would people please refrain from referring to Thomas Jefferson as TJ. I don't want to be confused with that scam.
I thought we were talking about Tijuana.
Incidentally, unlike our friend in this thread from the TJLS office "who ended up in Biglaw," TJLS grads may find Tijuana a good option once loan payments come due. They can return home frequently to see their families in San Diego as well.

Andy Dufresne would agree:

Image

Image

shoeshine

Silver
Posts: 1230
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 10:58 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by shoeshine » Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:29 pm

Brassica7 wrote:
I disagree with most of this.

First, the analogy is misleading. Junk bonds are high risk investments, but also command a high rate of return. They are therefore reasonable investments for people willing to take on substantial risk for the opportunity to grow their investments quickly. TJ is very high risk, but also low reward. Winning at TJ means making far less money/having fewer career and geographic options than those provided by the AAA-equivalent schools. TJ is both high risk and low return. Such investments do not exist naturally in a free marketplace, and are not similar to junk bonds.
Wrong. The unlikely but possible payout of TJLS is Big Law. As another poster has mentioned in this thread, it is not impossible to go to TJLS, transfer, and then get big law. It is obviously unlikely but just like a junk bond there is a high rate of return possible to at least a few TJLS students.
Brassica7 wrote: Second, the government is involved in these risky investments (attending a school like TJ) because it backs the loans. It shouldn't be. If people want to invest their own savings to attend TJ (or could find a private lender to loan the money, with some process for discharging the loans in bankruptcy), then fine. The government shouldn't give people money to speculate in the stock/bond markets, and neither should it support students attending law schools where most students will never have the chance to work as attorneys.

The free-market apparatus is broken because the government gives students tuition checks without the risk/reward calculation that a rational lender would make. This is not the case with junk bond investors. If TJ was completely open about the job opportunities from its school (posting prominently on its website/mailings that most of its students never get jobs as attorneys) then I might be okay with it existing if people still wanted to attend.
I agree with your point here (see my response here: http://top-law-schools.com/forums/viewt ... 3&start=64) But you are talking about larger education financial reform not just TTT law schools. I would argue that for profit entities (University of Phoenix, etc) are worse in some ways that TTT law schools.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
TaipeiMort

Silver
Posts: 869
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by TaipeiMort » Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:32 pm

I am going to say that I still don't think Lawl School is a real person.

Lord Randolph McDuff

Gold
Posts: 1592
Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2011 4:37 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Lord Randolph McDuff » Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:33 pm

If the govt. were to stop guaranteeing student loans for law school applicants, what would the ramifications be for top 100 schools?

I would imagine the pool of applicants would shrink drastically, as private money would obviously shy away from the "investment of a legal education."

Surely public interest types would still be able to attend law school--- new programs could be developed at the individual schools to admit a certain number of students a year who 1) want PI and 2) are good candidates for need-based aid.

I could see the applicant pool shrink by 60%, schools like mine would have to cut spots by 25%, schools in the second tier by up to 50%, in some cases schools outside the top 100 would melt away in 4-5 years. Obviously, there would be great resistance to this idea, including from legal academia which would have to shrink accordingly. But, wouldn't this bring equilibrium to the market within a few years? All without forcing the ABA to do a thing. It would take a long time to develop the grassroots political organization, but if the ducks could be lined up it would take only six months to get through committees and to the floor for a vote, likely packaged with a bunch of other shit, of course.

Is Fannie Mae the biggest stumbling block here?

User avatar
flem

Diamond
Posts: 12882
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by flem » Mon Apr 09, 2012 4:53 pm

shoeshine wrote: Wrong. The unlikely but possible payout of TJLS is Big Law. As another poster has mentioned in this thread, it is not impossible to go to TJLS, transfer, and then get big law. It is obviously unlikely but just like a junk bond there is a high rate of return possible to at least a few TJLS students.
Then that's not "out of TJLS", that's "I used TJLS as a stepping stone to transfer somewhere with actual job prospects after winning the curve lottery"

Even if you landed BigLaw out of TJLS, 98% of the students (optimism!) won't. With an entering class size of 400 people, 392 won't get a job that would allow them to service 153K worth of debt adequately. Therefore, for the overwhelming majority of people it's a terrible fucking investment. That's not a calculated risk. It's just objectively retarded.

User avatar
splitbrain

Silver
Posts: 656
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2011 11:38 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by splitbrain » Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:11 pm

tfleming09 wrote:Even if you landed BigLaw out of TJLS, 98% of the students (optimism!) won't. With an entering class size of 400 people, 392 won't get a job that would allow them to service 153K worth of debt adequately. Therefore, for the overwhelming majority of people it's a terrible fucking investment. That's not a calculated risk. It's just objectively retarded.
The argument is even more complicated than that: a ton of those people don't even make it through their first year. TJSL loses almost 1/3 of its 1Ls every year. So that's, what, $50k for a wasted year? What do those people even do with the exception of the few who transfer? I didn't even bother looking up 2L attrition.

ETA: Does that ABA attrition data include transfers? I know it specifically lists transfers elsewhere on the data sheets, so I wasn't sure. Still... I don't believe it does: UPenn had 7 transfers and 0 1L attrition, for example.
Last edited by splitbrain on Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:22 pm, edited 3 times in total.

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!


User avatar
moneybagsphd

Silver
Posts: 888
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 11:07 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by moneybagsphd » Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:11 pm

TaipeiMort wrote:I am going to say that I still don't think Lawl School is a real person.

User avatar
Bildungsroman

Platinum
Posts: 5529
Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2010 2:42 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by Bildungsroman » Mon Apr 09, 2012 5:14 pm

Just hustle and network, bro, and remember that your school only determines where you get your first job. After that it's smooth sailing on a wave of astroglide through an ocean of easy lays and extra-large wallets.

DTDT

New
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:01 pm

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by DTDT » Mon Apr 09, 2012 7:50 pm

Brassica7 wrote:
shoeshine wrote:TBF: Law school in general is a bad/risky investment.

TJLS is just at the riskiest end of the spectrum. It is the C grade junk bonds of the law school market (think of HYS as AAA+). So someone with a low appetite for risk should not buy (attend) the riskiest investment (school). However, that doesn't mean that there aren't people out there that want to undertake the risk of going to a school like TJLS. Its entire existence is a function of the market place. There are some people that want to go to law school but can't achieve the grades necessary to attend a T1. As long as they understand the risks I think they should be allowed and possibly encouraged to go.

I agree that, like any investment, TJLS should have to report accurate numbers so that students (investors) can make wise decisions. A few years ago I would have said that the information that people were getting about TJLS was completely false and they were border line performing fraud. However, now the tables have turned and there is more negative information out there about TJLS than positive. If you don't believe me just Google "Thomas Jefferson Law School" and look at the results on the first page. Between Paul Campos, NYT Articles, Scam Blogs, Threads on TLS, and Abovethelaw there is a ton of information available about the bar passage rates and employment prospects of TJLS. Any student who understands this information and still decides to attend is doing it at their own risk and we should not judge them for their decision.

I actually know someone who attends TJLS (which is more than the other people in this thread can say). She claims that most of the people in her class (1Ls) understood the job prospects coming into TJLS. Everyone has their own plan about what to do. Some people are gunning. Others plan on relying on family connections and others want to pursue things outside of law.

The point is that it is unfair to assume that all of the people choosing to attend TJLS aren't aware of the job prospects before entering. And if they are aware of that then they have made an informed decision that we really have no business judging them for. It is sort of elitist to deny people access to the practice of law based on our perceptions about whether they are making a good financial choice.


I disagree with most of this.

First, the analogy is misleading. Junk bonds are high risk investments, but also command a high rate of return. They are therefore reasonable investments for people willing to take on substantial risk for the opportunity to grow their investments quickly. TJ is very high risk, but also low reward. Winning at TJ means making far less money/having fewer career and geographic options than those provided by the AAA-equivalent schools. TJ is both high risk and low return. Such investments do not exist naturally in a free marketplace, and are not similar to junk bonds.

Second, the government is involved in these risky investments (attending a school like TJ) because it backs the loans. It shouldn't be. If people want to invest their own savings to attend TJ (or could find a private lender to loan the money, with some process for discharging the loans in bankruptcy), then fine. The government shouldn't give people money to speculate in the stock/bond markets, and neither should it support students attending law schools where most students will never have the chance to work as attorneys.

The free-market apparatus is broken because the government gives students tuition checks without the risk/reward calculation that a rational lender would make. This is not the case with junk bond investors. If TJ was completely open about the job opportunities from its school (posting prominently on its website/mailings that most of its students never get jobs as attorneys) then I might be okay with it existing if people still wanted to attend.
+1

User avatar
BarcaCrossesTheAlps

Bronze
Posts: 408
Joined: Wed May 11, 2011 11:43 am

Re: Do not attend TJSL

Post by BarcaCrossesTheAlps » Mon Apr 09, 2012 8:42 pm

Bildungsroman wrote:Just hustle and network, bro, and remember that your school only determines where you get your first job. After that it's smooth sailing on a wave of astroglide through an ocean of easy lays and extra-large wallets.

I would love to believe this. I just think it's a little too saccharin and oversimplified. Of course, you could be kidding, which means I'm slow on the up-take. :)

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Choosing a Law School”