Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - jack24

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 107
General Off-Topic Board / Re: Eternal Life
« on: July 16, 2012, 04:54:31 PM »
What about those who don't find/receive/earn/create eternal life?  What happens when they die?

Pursuing an LLM / Re: LLM in tax without a JD
« on: July 16, 2012, 04:29:02 PM »
I don't think you need an LLM.  I think a JD would help you more with your career.  I know a couple CPA's who got JDs and now do a combination of estate planning and tax.  Both of them had opportunities to do LLM's but their prospective employers recommended against it.

If you have a passion or a desire to practice tax law, bankruptcy, family law, or criminal law, you can do so as long as you OK in school.  (By contrast, it takes a ton of talent, skill, and luck to be an entertainment lawyer or a BigLaw M&A guy).

I don't usually tell anyone to give law school a second look (Statistically it's not a great decision for a large minority of students). In your case, I think you should really think about doing a J.D. if you can get into a school in the area you want to work.  Tax and Estate law are more predictable, your clients are likely to pay, and most of your clients will be happy.   If you stay on the transactional side, you'll have less emergencies than most other practice areas.  However, if you work on estate litigation (will/trust contests and probate) you'll get emails from the occasional pissed of client at night or on the weekend.

Beware of law school, unless you are a science rock star and want to do IP, or unless you are a Tax rock star and want to do Tax/Estate.

My four cents.

I don't know what you will get on the actual LSAT, so lets just assume you kill it.

I scored 160 with a 3.3 gpa adjusted down by LSAC to 2.99 (Damn you .01 percent!)   I was blown away that 159 was in the 80th percentile in my year.  A ton of T3 schools were willing to take a gamble on me because I scored better than 4/5 LSAT takers.  I got amazing scholarship offers, but I went to a respected T2 public school with no scholarship instead.  Probably a bad decision, in retrospect, but oh well.

Take a look at this

scroll down to the chart at the bottom.   A 170 is usually in the 97th percentile.   People who score 170+ are freaks.  You might be a freak.   You'll have admissions people dying to bring you in because the LSAT is king.   Get in that top 1 percent of test takers and you'll be able to go to a decent school for free.

Law School Admissions / Re: DO NOT GO TO LAW SCHOOL!!!
« on: July 12, 2012, 12:54:58 PM »

Jack, love the analysis, but the opportunity cost element of this equation is overstated if you ask me.

The reasons are:
1.  You will not save any of that money.  You'll consume 100% of it by living day-to-day.
2.  The day-to-day living is already accounted for in loans on the other half of the equation.

So, this is really taking the same variable and working against law school on both sides of the ledger.

Now, what is more accurate to say is that by working, you'll eat a little less ramen.  At the end of both periods, though, you won't have anything to show for it.  In the work case, you will break-even, in the LS case, you will have debt.  Once you account for the debt, you account for the entire impact of not-working.

Also, I am one of the majority of law students who, no way, no how, will get a lucrative job offer upon graduation.  Just won't happen.

I'm already resigned to starting my own practice, and I already know that's a road fraught with pitfalls.

Seems like the law is a great career for people who are either ultra-brainy (can pull a high class rank) or highly entrepreneurial.  It is not necessarily a great move for people who are merely moderately bright and get a minimal set of credentials.  (Unremarkable class rank and bar passage.)  Those folks might have had a great career in the law 50 years ago.  Not so much today.

It is probably overstated, but opportunity cost should at least include any money you could have saved, any assets you could have developed, and any interest you accrued during law school that I didn't include in the calculation.  Plus the better lifestyle during those years counts for something, at least.

Either way, over the long term, law school can make financial sense.

Legend makes some great points as well, but I'm not so sure people can identify whether they are right for law before trying it.   I love going to court as well.  I did it all the time during my internships, but I don't get to in my current job.
I have a good job for a fair wage doing assignments that bore me to tears.   If I wanted to be bored all day long I would have been a pharmacist.

Law School Admissions / Re: DO NOT GO TO LAW SCHOOL!!!
« on: July 12, 2012, 08:50:13 AM »
I agree that this outlook is refreshing.   But let's crunch the numbers.

Consider $125,000 in loans, payable over 25 years at 7.2 percent.

$125,000 in principal
$144,845 in interest
$120,000 in opportunity cost (From not working those three years of law school)

That works out to $15,593 per year for 25 years.   To break even, you have to average $15,593 more annual NET INCOME per year for 25 years.

Who knows how much you would have made without law school... but it's plausible, maybe probable, that a legal education will pay off by the 25 year mark for the median law student out there.

The BLS says the median pay for lawyers (not starting salary) in 2010 was $112,760.
sales managers in 2010 was $98,530.
computer systems analyst in 2010 was $77,740
Network Administrator: $69,160
Here's a list of some other business field careers and their medians.

A legal career pays off against almost all of those careers (for the median person).

I think it's a good investment in the long run for most people,  but:

1: A lot of people are below the median.  And a large portion (impossible to know how large) won't make enough money for it to be worth it.  However, maybe they would have sucked at everything else.
2: Law school doesn't teach you how to be a practicing lawyer or how to make money.
3: Law school is inefficient and the tuition was rising far too rapidly.
4: Legal jobs are so diverse, that it's extremely difficult to predict what kind of work you will be doing after graduation.
5: The first five years can be brutal for the massive portion of attorneys who start at less than 60k per year.

Choosing the Right Law School / Re: I want to go back to law school
« on: July 11, 2012, 12:27:21 PM »
I don't remember what your UGPA is (and I don't know if you are just messing around), but it looks like low 170s will be required.

Online Law Schools / Re: Help me pick an online law school
« on: July 10, 2012, 08:58:07 AM »

I'm genuinely curious about this.  Please tell me why you think it would be better to take one class at a time

Ask your mommy. I'm beginng to think there are a bunch of retards on this forum. I quit posting to this forum a while back and I am going to stop posting again. Too many uneducated people on here asking stupid common sense questions. I'm not responding to to stupid questions.

I guess you may not read this, but I'll post it anyway.
The law is all interconnected.  I believe studying legal writing/research, contracts, property, and civ pro at the same time helps you to solidify concepts.  This is important because it can help you retain a portion of the massive amount of information you will be exposed to.   You can move at a decent pace, familiarize yourself with the law, and get some valuable context as well.   It's not as if you are studying literature and physics at the same time.  While contracts and property are different, most people study them in a similar way.
Additionally, some classes are interdependent.  Some people may want to take corporate taxation without waiting too long after federal taxation, media law soon after con law, criminal procedure soon after criminal law, etc.  A one-at-a-time approach makes this difficult.

I haven't been insulted on this forum in a long time.  I'm getting all nostalgic.

Remember that even though law schools don't give you much credit for your degree type (Their rankings are affected by GPA and LSAT scores of their entering class), employers might.   Your degrees might be more appealing to IP firms, but I would call some firms you are interested in and ask them what schools they typically hire from. 
My current bosses are legal geeks and they wouldn't be impressed at all by a physics math joint degree, but I can think of a few hiring partners I've met who would be.  Very much so.

Online Law Schools / Re: Help me pick an online law school
« on: July 09, 2012, 08:40:12 AM »
I don't like Concord because they take multiple classes at once. I think it would be better to take one, or no more than two classes at a time. Concord doesn't have a video demo of the instructor teaching class like some of the other schools do. I also don't have the bachelors to get into Concord. I need like 7 more classes. So I might have to go to one of the other schools.

I'm genuinely curious about this.  Please tell me why you think it would be better to take one class at a time

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 107