1 year later....still glad u went to law school?

[animalaw]

The system is designed to make you work yourself in exhaustion -- simply to accumulate wealth for the companies you do business with and not for you. The most staggering of these examples is a home mortgage. Nearly two-thirds of the amount you pay over a 30 year mortgage is for interest. Interest is the profit of the mortgage company makes for lending you the money to buy the house. A 75,000 home at 9% interest would give you payments around $603.47 per month. At the end of thirty years you would have paid over $217,248.11 to the bank. In this example the interest earned by the bank was $142,248.11. That is over 200% return. Something is wrong with this picture. It is actually much worst than this. In order to pay the bank that $142,248.11 you would have to work and earn $197,566 because we have to pay taxes. It gets even worse when you take in account the lost interest due to not having the money gaining interest. If you had invested that interest in monthly installments then you would have had a nest-egg of only $723,143. THAT IS THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

Are the banks doing us such a tremendous favor that you should wear yourself out for over three decades. IT IS YOUR MONEY. You worked for it. It is not fair. You work for it. Yet they end up with it. It is simple legal larceny. They are stealing your wealth right from under you. Now, granted it is very difficult for anyone to get a house without a loan. But it does not make since to pay on a mortgage for over thirty years. For the past 15 years this information has been out about pre-paying your mortgage. And for fifteen years the banks have misled the people into saying that it could not be paid off. It is the same scam that the Credit Bureaus have run on people for years. They know that they cannot tell you the truth because it would eliminate their profits. The solution is to put as much cash down as possible and pay off the loan by using bi-weekly equity acceleration to save hundreds of thousands of dollars interest. I can not believe that people are still paying on thirty year mortgages. If you have an accountant to tell you not to get rid of the mortgage,' because it is the last good tax shelter', GET A NEW ACCOUNTANT. What he really is saying is to spend a dollar in order to get $0.28 back on tax dollars.

Great Point. You argument is flawed nonetheless. It would not benefit you even in the slightest to take part in equity acceleration if you have no intention on staying in your house for 10 or more years. [...]

So are you saying anything ot not, Anna?

[jarhead]

yes its one year later and im still glad i went to law school.

[unexceptionable]

[xferlawstudent]

Not really, helga, you break even in the example shown above only after 35 years. If you pay $215,800 in interest that means that $900 a month out of the $2,150 monthly payment has gone to the bank pockets and you would pay $1,250 to rent the same house. This means that you could pay the same amount of rent for another 14-15 years using the $215,000 amount that you paid in interest. It is only then that you would need additional money to cover the rent.

In actuality, this example may have a pretty good ROI (return on investment), close to 30%; for instance, if you take the mortgage when you are, say 30, you will be breaking even at 65, having 10 years to \'make profits,\' that is to say not pay rent (with the average life expectancy 75 years) -- you would make $150,000 profit on a $515,000 investment.   

The problem is that most mortgages nowadays extend over a 30 year period. 

The system is designed to make you work yourself in exhaustion -- simply to accumulate wealth for the companies you do business with and not for you. The most staggering of these examples is a home mortgage. Nearly two-thirds of the amount you pay over a 30 year mortgage is for interest. Interest is the profit of the mortgage company makes for lending you the money to buy the house. A 75,000 home at 9% interest would give you payments around $603.47 per month. At the end of thirty years you would have paid over $217,248.11 to the bank. In this example the interest earned by the bank was $142,248.11. That is over 200% return. Something is wrong with this picture. It is actually much worst than this. In order to pay the bank that $142,248.11 you would have to work and earn $197,566 because we have to pay taxes. It gets even worse when you take in account the lost interest due to not having the money gaining interest. If you had invested that interest in monthly installments then you would have had a nest-egg of only $723,143. THAT IS THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

Are the banks doing us such a tremendous favor that you should wear yourself out for over three decades. IT IS YOUR MONEY. You worked for it. It is not fair. You work for it. Yet they end up with it. It is simple legal larceny. They are stealing your wealth right from under you. Now, granted it is very difficult for anyone to get a house without a loan. But it does not make since to pay on a mortgage for over thirty years. For the past 15 years this information has been out about pre-paying your mortgage. And for fifteen years the banks have misled the people into saying that it could not be paid off. It is the same scam that the Credit Bureaus have run on people for years. They know that they cannot tell you the truth because it would eliminate their profits. The solution is to put as much cash down as possible and pay off the loan by using bi-weekly equity acceleration to save hundreds of thousands of dollars interest. I can not believe that people are still paying on thirty year mortgages. If you have an accountant to tell you not to get rid of the mortgage,\' because it is the last good tax shelter\', GET A NEW ACCOUNTANT. What he really is saying is to spend a dollar in order to get 28 cents back on tax dollars.

As to the pre-payment, there was an article published by the Federal Reserve in the past few months that calculated that you are better off taking the pre=payment money and putting into 401K or IRA, than to prepay a mortgage.

[by extension]

The system is designed to make you work yourself in exhaustion -- simply to accumulate wealth for the companies you do business with and not for you. The most staggering of these examples is a home mortgage. Nearly two-thirds of the amount you pay over a 30 year mortgage is for interest. Interest is the profit of the mortgage company makes for lending you the money to buy the house. A 75,000 home at 9% interest would give you payments around $603.47 per month. At the end of thirty years you would have paid over $217,248.11 to the bank. In this example the interest earned by the bank was $142,248.11. That is over 200% return. Something is wrong with this picture. It is actually much worst than this. In order to pay the bank that $142,248.11 you would have to work and earn $197,566 because we have to pay taxes. It gets even worse when you take in account the lost interest due to not having the money gaining interest. If you had invested that interest in monthly installments then you would have had a nest-egg of only $723,143. THAT IS THREE-QUARTERS OF A MILLION DOLLARS!!!!!

Are the banks doing us such a tremendous favor that you should wear yourself out for over three decades. IT IS YOUR MONEY. You worked for it. It is not fair. You work for it. Yet they end up with it. It is simple legal larceny. They are stealing your wealth right from under you. Now, granted it is very difficult for anyone to get a house without a loan. But it does not make since to pay on a mortgage for over thirty years. For the past 15 years this information has been out about pre-paying your mortgage. And for fifteen years the banks have misled the people into saying that it could not be paid off. It is the same scam that the Credit Bureaus have run on people for years. They know that they cannot tell you the truth because it would eliminate their profits. The solution is to put as much cash down as possible and pay off the loan by using bi-weekly equity acceleration to save hundreds of thousands of dollars interest. I can not believe that people are still paying on thirty year mortgages. If you have an accountant to tell you not to get rid of the mortgage,' because it is the last good tax shelter', GET A NEW ACCOUNTANT. What he really is saying is to spend a dollar in order to get $0.28 back on tax dollars.

Great Point. You argument is flawed nonetheless. It would not benefit you even in the slightest to take part in equity acceleration if you have no intention on staying in your house for 10 or more years. [...]

So are you saying anything ot not, Anna?

Do you think she really needs to say anything else?!

[JackTaylorsPlace]

I was a 1L night student last year, switched to full time this go around and am finishing up the first semester of my second year.


This might be the worst mistake I ever made.

[al so]

In Europe, the state pays for the institutional costs of instruction; students pay little or no tuition, but are responsible for living costs; and most universities are public.

In the US, by contrast, student loans have become the most profitable, uncompetitive, oppressive, and predatory type of debt of any in the nation. This has occurred due to legislation that was largely paid for by the the lobbying machine of Sallie Mae, the largest student loan company in America. Vast personal fortunes are being made by both Sallie Mae executives, and others who paid for this legislation, at the expense of decent citizens who were not able to capitalize on their education. This has effectively crippled MILLIONS of decent citizens who want to repay their original debt, but are prevented from doing so by staggeringly higher amounts being demanded from them by both non-profit, and for-profit student loan companies.

That is the reason why many medical students enroll in a foreign school -- the Caribbean Medical Schools are usually less expensive and much more affordable compared to US medical schools. Often the education is a bargain even when extra costs, such as traveling abroad, health insurance and other miscellaneous costs, are included.

The downside is that not all of these schools are accredited. They must make sure their MD degree will be accepted in the US, though. Four states (California, Florida, New Jersey, and New York) evaluate foreign medical schools individually, with most Caribbean medical schools not being accredited in all four of these states. Schools like Ross School of Medicine, Saba School of Medicine, and St. George University (SGU) have the best reputations among Caribbean schools.

What this means is that students completing their studies in such schools might be at a disadvantage when competing for strong residencies. However, the USMLE scores are an important determinant of the residency match, so strong USMLE scores make up for a lot and can be a great equalizer. Another disadvantage is that often the clinical rotations are done in US medical schools. Many Caribbean Medical Schools have arrangements with US hospitals, but the students options in rotations might be limited compared to the options available to a student in a US medical school.

One could have exciting opportunities to contribute to medical science without having necessarily to suffer through a few years of 80- or 100-hour sleepless clinical training.

[Ordinary L. Student]

Absolutely.  Most interesting thing I've ever done.

[heinz]

You know what? I've never been afraid of law school. Maybe during the first week or two, or the week before my oral arguments in 1L I was NERVOUS or ANXIOUS about the public speaking aspect, but I certainly wasn't hiding under my bed vomiting like these people make it sound.

Oral is always stressful. Oral exams in the format of a general chat are one-sided with the pacing and topic all up to the examiner. The latter's prompts provided are crucial to the performance of the student, whilst the attitude and mood of examiner becomes a large factor in the student's performance. For instance, a poor student performance could well be due to the examiner not being able to establish a rapport with the student. It is difficult for the student to play a natural, active role during an oral exam. Not to mention that some students get so tense that they "freeze up," and blank out due to extreme pressure. Thus, they may not demonstrate their knowledge and preparation, given the fact that they muddle through the exam as if they were incapable of functioning under the stress of the oral.

[To Those Who Do]

You know what? I've never been afraid of law school. Maybe during the first week or two, or the week before my oral arguments in 1L I was NERVOUS or ANXIOUS about the public speaking aspect, but I certainly wasn't hiding under my bed vomiting like these people make it sound.

Oral is always stressful. Oral exams in the format of a general chat are one-sided with the pacing and topic all up to the examiner. The latter's prompts provided are crucial to the performance of the student, whilst the attitude and mood of examiner becomes a large factor in the student's performance. For instance, a poor student performance could well be due to the examiner not being able to establish a rapport with the student. It is difficult for the student to play a natural, active role during an oral exam. Not to mention that some students get so tense that they "freeze up," and blank out due to extreme pressure. Thus, they may not demonstrate their knowledge and preparation, given the fact that they muddle through the exam as if they were incapable of functioning under the stress of the oral.

That's all nice and dandy, Heinz, but we're talking about the oral argument, not oral exams; after all, there aren't any oral exams in law school.