Thursday, August 23, 2012

Unemployment

Don LeDuc, Cooley Law School's President, has been trumpeting supposedly low unemployment rates among lawyers. Others have taken up that cry, either by name or anonymously.  Matt Leichter debunked these arguments almost a year ago, but they keep recurring.  So let's look one more time at the facts.

LeDuc and the others imbibing Cooley-ade note that, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, only 2.1% of lawyers were unemployed in 2011.  Since 8.9% of the general workforce was unemployed that year, that 2.1% is a pretty alluring number.  Prospective law students are likely to jump to the conclusion that 97.9% of JDs were gainfully employed in jobs using their degrees.  Only stands to reason, right?

Sorry, but no.  As labor economists recognize, skilled workers can--and do--take jobs below their training level.  The four largest occupations in the United States are:  retail salesperson, cashier, office clerk, and fast food worker.  A JD holder can do any of those jobs.  Likewise, most law graduates could fill seven of the next eight most populous jobs: waiter or waitress; customer service representative; janitor or cleaner; laborer or freight/stock mover; secretary or administrative assistant; general or operations manager; and stock clerk or order filler.  Only one of the twelve most common U.S. jobs, registered nurse, requires training that a JD lacks.

The eleven open-to-JD occupations listed above, by the way, account for a full 21.3% of the U.S. labor force.  So a lawyer almost always can get a job.  The question is what kind of job can the lawyer get--and will the job justify the cost of obtaining a law degree?

On that question, we have very informative data.  NALP reports that, a full nine months after graduation, 9.6% of 2011 law school graduates were unemployed and seeking work; they had no jobs whatsoever.  Another 10.0% were working part-time, and still another 5% held full-time jobs for which the JD conferred no advantage.  One out of every four graduates was unemployed, working part-time, or not using their JD.

Even that is a low estimate of under-employment among law school graduates.  It doesn't account for the graduates working in temporary, contract law jobs.  It doesn't account for the graduates who are unemployed but have stopped seeking work.  It doesn't account for the graduates who disappeared, leaving no trace of any jobs for their law schools to report (6.5% in that category alone).  Nor does it account for the graduates working in "JD advantage" jobs that they might have obtained with just a BA.  All told, a full nine months after graduation, only 56% of the JD class of 2011 held full-time jobs that required bar admission.

The other 44% aren't college graduates with a BA in Renaissance Humanism or Heavy Drinking.  Those grads might take a year or two to find a suitable job.  Law graduates are hard workers with seven years of expensive higher education under their belts.  Most of them started seeking legal jobs two-and-a-half years before graduation. Their high rates of under- and unemployment nine months after graduation speak volumes about the current state of the legal market.

Touting the BLS occupational unemployment statistics is one of the most misleading statements a law school professor or administrator can make; it shows a complete misunderstanding of the labor market. The BLS, in fact, doesn't even publish these statistics on its website; labor economists know that these figures tell very little.  Instead, listen to what the BLS itself advises about careers in law:  "Competition for jobs should continue to be strong because more students are graduating from law school each year than there are jobs available." Right: About twice as many students as jobs.


122 comments:

  1. Great post DJM. I have sort of heard about the 2.1% figure and this makes a lot of sense.

    I do have one question though, I was under the impression that in order for there to be an "unemployed lawyer" one must have worked as a lawyer before hand.

    I'm sure someone else could clarify. Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Weird, I was just looking at the BLS statistics last night and thought the same thing: these stats are totally bogus. I especially like their section on pay- median $112,760, lowest 10% $54,130 lol. Their stats are worse than worthless, they completely mislead most people who will be reading them, and should not even be published.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My recollection, not perfect, is that BLS income data is generated using IRS income reporting and activity codes for the employees. As such it should be fairly accurate with respect to people actually making a living as lawyers.

      The BLS data is interesting and useful because it covers all lawyers - many of whom have been in practice for several decades. A couple of years ago I found this data (and was in contact with Prof Campos about it). The data is important because it can be looked at Metro area by Metro area and raises very difficult questions about law school data. The issue is that 2-4 years ago it seemed that every law school was claiming salary data of $160k no matter where that law school was - but this salary meant that their neophyte graduates were uniformly being paid in every metro significantly more than the average working attorney. It did not make sense then and does not make sense now.


      MacK

      Delete
    2. "...income data is generated using IRS income reporting and activity codes for the employees".

      How many lawyers have official "employers" who report income amounts/categories of their "employees"?

      I ask this because (a) I have no idea, and (b) wonder whether all lawyers who are not strictly in an employee-employer relationship (which covers, I think, solos, small firms, etc.?) are thereby not included in these stats?

      Delete
    3. If you file as self employed you also need to generate the income forms and ditto if you have a PLLC (which is normal) and you need to put in the business code. So yes, I think the IRS captures this data.

      Delete
  3. Antiro, that's right. To count as an unemployed lawyer, you must (a) have worked as a lawyer, (b) be unemployed, and (c) continue to look for a legal job. None of the following folks would count as unemployed lawyers:

    Alice, who graduated from law school last year and has been unable to find work (unemployed, but not as a lawyer).

    Ben, who runs a solo firm that has been losing money for the last six months (employed).

    Carol, who lost her job as a lawyer and, after months of looking, settled for a job as a substitute high school teacher (employed).

    David, who lost his job as a lawyer and, after months of looking, decided to stay home and take care of his young children for a while (not seeking employment).

    Unemployment statistics are very slippery.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Add in?
      - Edmund, who was once employed as a lawyer, lost that, looked like crazy for another lawyer job, couldn't get it, and is now still unemployed, but trying hard to get on as a substitute elementary school teacher - (unemployed former lawyer who is still unemployed, still seeking employment , just not seeking a law job).

      Delete
  4. The new format for coments and responses to comments is a big improvement over its predecessor. William Ockham

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was just about to say -- omg! threading! amazing!

      And now I don't have to stretch out the whole list of posts just for that stupid comment! :)

      Delete
  5. The fact is that people who go to law school are already, before they even attend, highly motivated people who are seeking success and social status far more than the normal person. So they are going to get a job whether or not they attended law school. And to the same, but lesser degree, people who go to college and graduate are also more motivated and driven than the normal. They were that way before they ever set foot in college or law school.

    Self selection bias, etc.

    Of course the higher education industry manipulates this, and the media in turn, stenographically "reports" these bogus stats as if they have real meaning.

    in some ways the USA is based on a web of bogus stats. Have you ever tried to find out the median income for individual american earners? It's not that easy to do. The gov't stats are far more concerned with household income, which is much harder to use as a comparison because each household is different with respect to how many income earners live there.

    The median individual earner income is something like 26K, and that is for people 25 years or older. Yet the number that must people would give you is probably something like 40K.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your point, I believe, underscores that tired old line about the "the versatility of a law degree." Those who earn a JD (myself included) will be working, doing something, anything, because they are intrinsically motivated to succeed (or at least break even!). That motivation, as you said, was there before they ever set foot on college or in law school.

      Delete
  6. when dealing with the use of employment and income stats by american institutions, governmental and otherwise, Orwell's book 1984 should be the guide.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thank you DJM. Anon, you can fuck off now. Nobody is buying your shit.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  9. "Prospective law students are likely to jump to the conclusion that 97.9% of JDs were gainfully employed in jobs using their degrees. Only stands to reason, right?"

    So wrong that your entire post is unnecessary.

    C'mon Paul, if there's nothing new to say, don't waste the time and effort rehashing the same old, same old.

    Like someone said the other day, you should post the 0L warning piece as the top post rather than have it buried under worthless new posts like this one.

    Your narcissistic daily posts are about you, not "the scam."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I guarantee a large majority of this blog's readership disagrees with you. I know I do.

      This is called staying on message. Are we there yet, in terms of correcting the scam? No. A post a day is a great thing. As long as Don LeDuc keeps talking, so should our champions.

      Delete
    2. Dude, this post isn't even by Campos, but by DJM. Apparently you cannot even read.

      Delete
    3. Dear LawProf and DJM:

      I hate your stupid updates so much, yet I always read them and am one of the first people to comment and let you know how stupid they are.

      Please just shut up so I can keep this gravy train of naive and misled 0L tuition money (t)rolling.

      Thanks,
      Mr. You-Post-Too-Much

      /sarcasm

      Great post DJM. Love this blog. Please keep 'em coming.

      Delete
  10. Above applies to DJM as well...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If people keep repeating the same bullshit argument, you need to fire back with the same de-bunking. You're not convincing anyone by saying they shouldn't.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    3. Why do you care? This is their blog, they can write what they want to address. Taking the time to whine in the comments about how they should stop makes you look like an idiot.

      Delete
    4. Just ignore this troll. It sis attention he/she seeks.

      Delete
  11. Good post, one of DJM's best

    Thank you to both of you, for everything

    ReplyDelete
  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Prof. Merritt, is there any evidence that those with JDs are disproportionately employed below their skill level as compared to other professionals? If not, then what is the relevance of your speculation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Reading comprehension fail?

      "only 56% of the JD class of 2011 held full-time jobs that required bar admission"

      Delete
    2. This is a good point. Most people with JDs who can't get jobs as lawyers probably become doctors or architects. Or maybe astronauts.

      Delete
    3. Don't forget professional football player. Also concert pianist. I think I read somewhere that 4.8% of unemployed JDs go into concert pianism.

      Delete
    4. I thought the question was whether the JD fail is similar in other professions (i.e. people with accounting degrees that can't get accounting jobs, people with computer science degrees that can't get programming jobs). I don't think it detracts from the substance of DJM's post but it would be an interesting tidbit if this information was out there.

      Delete
  14. I see that Mr. You-Post-Too-Much is back. Only a law profesor or administrator would be so obsessed with muzzling LP and DJM.

    He tries to disguise his effort at shutting them up as a way to strengthen the message. But what he's really saying is "Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?"

    ReplyDelete
  15. "The other 44% aren't college graduates with a BA in Renaissance Humanism or Heavy Drinking."

    The points of the post are generally well taken, but is the dig at liberal arts majors really necessary? Is it really an enhancement to your argument? Since you seem to like statistics, please provide data showing that such majors work less hard than other students. The fact is, liberal arts majors work very hard. Some of them even go to law school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A BA in Heavy Drinking requires 10 semesters I believe.

      Delete
    2. I think her point is that many "adults" claim that these "young punks" graduating college who can't get jobs did not work hard, only played. So what do those same people say to young attorneys, who got into law school, and spent 3 years there after college, and still don't have a job??? Is that a JD with a concentration in Law and Alcohol the reason?? One may argue that it is, but I seem to remember a President or three, CEOs, etc. who weren't exactly know for their rigorous attention to their studies ...

      Delete
    3. I believe you mean boomers. Boomers are the parents that want to believe the generation they gave birth to and raised are just lazy partiers

      Delete
    4. If heavy drinking is a liberal art, I majored in the wrong liberal art degree

      Delete
    5. You don't need to waste money on a study to know liberal art degrees are in general much easier to obtain than science and engineering

      Delete
  16. "Touting the BLS occupational unemployment statistics is one of the most misleading statements a law school professor or administrator can make; it shows a complete misunderstanding of the labor market. " (emphasis added by the anonymouse)

    I think the highlighted portion may be a little generous. In most cases, I doubt it's a misunderstanding (ignorance) of the true market. At best, I'd say it's a willful blindness. But in many cases, I think it's more like an attitude of "so long as I have an authoritative source [BLS] for refudiation*, I will continue to use it, the heck with finding out what's "true". (" And what is 'Truth', anyway, really?")"

    Not unlike how the criminal defense lawyer may avoid delving too deeply into whether or not a client is "truly" innocent.

    It's all about what the prosecution (here, those seeking reform) can "prove", and about what "facts" can be garnered to "cast a reasonable doubt" on the employment outlook the reformers posit.

    In this regard, then, LS deans and their helpful apologists who keep tossing up the BLS numbers are very much like ambulance chasers. Kinda sad...

    *Hey, if it's good enough for politics...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It does show a complete misapprehension of how the BLS arrives at its data and how it categorises workers. Thus a lawyer in BLS is someone who has been employed as a lawyer, not just some poor schmoe with a JD and bar admission.

      When you think about it, that very test filters for the more successful law school graduates, those who have experience, top grades or a top school and were able to get hired out of law school. Given the high premium the profession places on experience it is logical that this group, who have already been employed as lawyers (i.e., experienced) would gave lower unemployment rates that newly minted JDs.

      Delete
  17. "I see that Mr. You-Post-Too-Much is back. Only a law profesor or administrator would be so obsessed with muzzling LP and DJM."

    And only a "law professor" or administrator would have this much free time to post on such a blog. I knew several "profs" who spent most of their office hours reading the WSJ, perusing law blogs, surfing the internet and putting together their grocery lists. Remember, their teaching loads are pathetic - and provide them with ample down time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. See- you've just got the wrong attitude. "I knew several "profs" who spent most of their office hours reading the WSJ, perusing law blogs, surfing the internet and putting together their grocery lists".

      These are all, surely, arguably, maybe even irrefudiatably, related to the professor's professional work.

      (well, still working on a plausible excuse for the groceries. Maybe "consumer price market research"?)

      Delete
  18. “If you are not going to law school ... what is your alternative path?” asks Erwin Chemerinsky, founding dean of the University of California, Irvine School of Law. “And in purely economic terms, is it better than law school? ... It’s not just monetary ... There are all sorts of exciting things you can do with a law degree.”

    From a Zahorsky abajournal.com article on the 22nd (link below).

    Gosh, glad to hear "...there are all sorts of exciting things you can do with a law degree"!

    Some excellent examples of how your LS diploma can offer lots of hair-raising excitement are available from the second link. Someone please purchase a copy and send to dear Dean Chemerinsky for his birthday.

    http://www.abajournal.com/lawscribbler/article/law_profs_ideal_affordable_law_school_not_possible_in_reality_chemerinsky/

    http://www.amazon.com/Complete-Book-Origami-Step--Instructions/dp/0486258378/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1345815471&sr=1-1&keywords=books+on+origami

    ReplyDelete
  19. Can't the ABA just require a minimum LSAT score for law school admission? They require the LSAT for accreditation, so isn't this an obivious, logical step?

    They could set this number below an average taker's ability, like 149-150 and it would wipe out thousands of entrants, most of whom struggled to maintain a B average in college.

    Cooley and many other schools would have to close, but the ABA wouldn't be shutting them down by fiat. If they can't compete for students with respectable numbers (by lowering their absurd tuition), then that's their problem.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This would indeed be a good move. Why is the LSAT required for accreditation if people in the bottom decile can easily get into law school—perhaps even with a scholarship at Cooley & Cie?

      On the other hand, this change would greatly expand the corrupt LSAT-training industry, essentially yet another means for the children of the rich to buy their way into law school.

      But don't look to the ABA to do anything that would force the closure of dozens of law schools—and the firing of thousands of law professors.

      Delete
    2. And the ABA could also use the BLS average income data for lawyers and for the general population where a law school is situated to set criteria for what is an acceptable cost of attendance.

      Delete
  20. Leichter makes the point--which cannot be repeated often enough--that people trumpeting these numbers tend to conflate having a JD with working as an attorney. The large numbers of JD holders who never really practice law are never counted in determining "average attorney salaries." But they should still be factored into everyone's cost-to-benefit analysis when deciding whether to attend law school.

    Prof. Campos' previous characterization of Don LeDuc is classic--"a carnival barker with a law degree."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When somebody talks up the 'versatility' of a professional degree, they should be regarded with suspicion.

      Delete
  21. I would suggest all of the conversations in the comments here (save for the profanity laced tirades, off the wall comments, etc.) would be appropriate for a webchat with the Secretary of Education on student loans and higher ed financing. It is today (August 24) at 11 am ET. Ask the CEO of Direct Loans, Inc. your questions on the law school bubble and see if you get an answer:
    http://lifeinc.today.com/_news/2012/08/17/13337674-join-education-secretary-arne-duncan-for-a-live-web-chat

    ReplyDelete
  22. I followed this blog over the past several weeks. First, I agree that there is a crisis in legal education and I have been alerting students to view this blog. That said, I do not see the dire conditions stated here among recent grads I know. The facts: I am 10 years out. I attended CU and actually transferred to a 3rd tier school. I graduated near the top of the class and never worked during the school year or summers. After law school, I clerked for a federal district court judge. I moved back to Colorado and have had no difficulty finding jobs over the past 8 years. I have held four different public law jobs and now earn 100K. During that time, I have come in contact with many JD’s circa 2005-2011. I stay in contact with many of my former colleagues and don’t know a single person who is out of work. While my contact base is generally people working in public law, many have moved from public law positions to law firms. Prior to my current position, I worked in a DA’s office. The office has experienced a healthy amount of turnover as people move to private practice or to other public law jobs (AG, judgeships, etc). I had lunch with a person yesterday who has the following experience: 2005 grad – state SC clerkship - associate at a large Denver law firm – DDA – civil practice (he hated the firm) – now works for state in a high level atty position. He moved from job to job with no problems finding a job. I am sure the job market is tight; just don’t see it from my perspective.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Are you even paying attention? How much debt did you have? How much did your degree cost? Look at what it would cost you now.

      Now consider the current job market. Do you think you could get the same job today as when you graduated?

      Finally, think of your great selection bias. You know a few people who have jobs and you think that means there isn't a problem? You do understand more than half of law grads won't get a job in this profession, righ?

      Delete
    2. I think the problem is the lazy JDs nowadays don't want to do federal district court clerkships anymore. Clerkship hiring has become way easier the last few years. I'm hitting the clerkship market next year and I hear that plenty of D. Ct. judges and even some COA judges are getting applications in the single digits.

      Delete
    3. "I moved back to Colorado and have had no difficulty finding jobs over the past 8 years. I have held four different public law jobs and now earn 100K. During that time, I have come in contact with many JD’s circa 2005-2011. I stay in contact with many of my former colleagues and don’t know a single person who is out of work."


      This is because you would hardly have unemployed colleagues at your place of work.

      Delete
    4. I agree most practicing lawyers are doing okay, even if their practice has declined somewhat in the past 5 years. I also did some time in the DA's office after LS graduation and it was great experience.

      The problem is that new JD's are paying roughly double what you paid (if you paid full retail); and many of them will never get that first legal job which will teach them how to practice.

      Delete
  23. The sad state of affairs is that law school deans, faculty and administrators are often not looking out for their students or even being honest with their students, instead they are taking an adversarial position, especially vis-a-vis prospective students.

    In this twisted environment, the legal training and "thinking like a lawyer" mantra that comes out of law schools is being used by the deans, faculty, et al. against students and prospective students who don't know any better.

    ReplyDelete
  24. 2012 Mr. Infinity Productions in association with Mr. Infinity himself present a brand new series on why the scamblogs will fail.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ii5AtDZRE0&feature=youtu.be

    http://gotolawschool.blogspot.com


    Disclaimer: this video is for entrainment purposes only. Statements made about individuals do not guarantee representation of factual information (for example, DJM may not be Professor Campos imaginary friend, that is only a theory.)

    © 2012 Mr. Infinity Productions. Reproduction of this video is allowed only for educational purposes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Mr. Infinity moniker refers to the countless ways that you stink.

      Delete
    2. Still wondering how your ad revenues are shaping up for August?

      Are they increasing now that you've been more actively trying to drive traffic to your blog? Or still flat? Are your efforts panning out for you?

      C'mon, Mr.I., Inquiringmindswannaknow.

      Delete
    3. When Nando posts his class rank and GPA then I'll post my earnings. How's that sound?

      Mr. Infinity

      Delete
    4. "When Nando posts his class rank and GPA then I'll post my earnings. "

      Okay, but two things to note. I only ask about earnings from the `site, not your day job. I'm thinking about starting a competing, anti-anti-scamblog blog blog. Maybe that should be written, "anti-((anti-scamblog)blog)blog". In any event, you could help me understand whether, with applied diligence, I could expect to make, say, $20 a month, or as much as, say, $33 per month.

      The second thing to note is, I have no control over Nando's behaviour. If he has or hasn't posted his grades to date, or whether anyone's even asked him to, I wouldn't know.

      Delete
    5. People resort to attacking the messenger when they know they can't win the argument.

      Delete
    6. What do you mean when you say the scamblogs will fail?

      Delete
    7. 9 minutes of my life I'll never get back. Should have charged 0.2 hours.

      Delete
    8. Not entirely true: sometimes people attack the messenger because the messenger is a gigantic twat (like most of the Campos' strokers here).

      Delete
  25. Mr Infinity, took a few minutes and watched your Video. You sound like an idiot and you have nothing to add to this discussion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing has been added to this discussion on this blog or any other for the past year, so he's in good? company.

      Delete
  26. If the colleges were better, if they really had it, you would need to get the police at the gates to keep order in the inrushing multitude. See in college how we thwart the natural love of learning by leaving the natural method of teaching what each wishes to learn, and insisting that you shall learn what you have no taste or capacity for. The college, which should be a place of delightful labor, is made odious and unhealthy, and the young men are tempted to frivolous amusements to rally their jaded spirits. I would have the studies elective. Scholarship is to be created not by compulsion, but by awakening a pure interest in knowledge. The wise instructor accomplishes this by opening to his pupils precisely the attractions the study has for himself. The marking is a system for schools, not for the college; for boys, not for men; and it is an ungracious work to put on a professor.

    Ralph Waldo Emerson

    ReplyDelete
  27. I haven't been paying much attention to this whole back and forth about Mr. Infinity and his blog (and if his handle were indeed a reference to the luxury car nameplate of Nissan, he's mispelled it), until today.

    Believe you me, nobody wants to hear a more fulsome defense of the law school status quo than myself; it would make the whole enterprise of having been hosed by law school and pigeon-holeed with a decidedly non-versatile j.d. seem blessedly more imaginary than I've believed it, and therefore easier to fix. I certainly hope that Mr. Infinity is up to the task. The first couple of weeks of posts on his blog do not suggest that he is.

    His stated aims are admirable, if perhaps a little grandiose. To wit:

    "-MYTHBUSTER: Why a JD makes a valuable resume addition.
    -Why you can do well out of ANY ABA law school.
    -The negativity that scambloggers have. Re: telling you why every possible thing you mention doing is a losing game. Scambloggers by nature are negative people with very little vision for their lives. No matter what major they would have went into, they would have had an excuse for their ultimate failure.
    -MYTHBUSTER: Why law is not a saturated field.
    -MYTHBUSTER: Why law school is no more expensive than other programs.
    -The truth why scambloggers can't find jobs: they are too busy complaining.
    -Why law will not nor can be completely outsourced."

    It's entirely possible that he'll get around to addressing the five of these points that don't involve trashing scambloggers (most of whose blogs, I should say, I do not read). But if what you're looking for are a series of highly conclusory blog posts mostly aimed at taking down Nando and not actually addressing the crisis in American legal education (apart from one or two throw away lines that not such crisis exists, and that anybody who suggest otherwise must suck at life), then I'd advise you'd look elsewhere for the elusive, and badly needed, "other side" to this debate.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mr.Infinity: The Borat of the anti-scamblog "movement."

    P.S. I want my 8 minutes back.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Wait a second, 27,224 graduates were in full time jobs with bar passage required - and 15,999 of them reported salaries?! Both of these numbers seem high.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wait one fucking second, only 42,000 people in this survey? Aren't there 190 law schools? Are you telling me the average law school class size is only 221 (42,000 / 190) people?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Mr. Infinity comes across, well, as not very bright.

    And in anticipation of an attack on my inherent laziness from Mr. Infinity, I must mention that I attended a T10 school 25 years ago, was a summa cum laude/law review editor/order of the coif type, and have had a successful business and legal career. Oh, and I paid for this education on my own, and was a Division 1 scholarship athlete/All American too boot - in other words - not an effete member of the chattering class inclined to believe the pull yourself up by the bootstraps crap the Mr. Infinity's of the world so often spout.

    Like vbp, I await any kind of substance from Mr. Infinity.

    I support Professor Campos. Law school is a poor value (beyond belief poor), and that poor value is being financed by the taxpayer with economic ruin the result. And it is a scam, because the scheme works to transfer money from students (through the federal government's programs) to academics, with no sound economic or business reasons to continue the practice.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Mack. Care to add a few more imaginary accomplishments to your well padded resume?

      Delete
    2. Not me - are you Mr. Infinity, trolling?

      Delete
    3. To put it another way - my schol was T14 but not T10 (I think) and I graduated 20 years ago. I was not an "All American" but I rowed until I blew out my knee and shot rifle and sailed. I was not a law review editor. I did, with some help from my parents, pay for most of my own legal education and did not have loans (though I tried to get one my last year and was not eligeable.)

      I have had a pretty successful career so far (touch wood) some of which can be ascribed to ability - but quite a good bit to luck and serendipity - and I practice international and internationally. None of that is imaginary - I do what I do.

      However, were I graduating today - 20 years down the road, I would be so screwed... and actually, given what tuition is today, I could not have afforded law school in all likelihood anyway. Moreover, the luck and serendipity I mentioned is in very short supply today compared to even a decade ago,

      So overall anonymous - FYVM. Go off and piss on someone else.

      Delete
  32. Wait one damn motherfucking minute - why does DJM constantly gloss over the most important statistic, which is number of students who report having a salary?

    For the 27,224 graduates with a job where a JD is required - how could it be that you know a JD is required - REQUIRED - yet you do not know their salary information for over 11,000 of them?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wash yer mouth outAugust 24, 2012 at 11:29 AM

      "For the 27,224 graduates with a job where a JD is required - how could it be that you know a JD is required - REQUIRED - yet you do not know their salary information for over 11,000 of them?!"


      Are you really so dense you're having trouble figuring this out?

      Ever "skip a question" on a questionnaire?

      It's just that simple. Those who do not want to give salary info, abstain from doing so.

      Delete
  33. PEOPLE PEOPLE PEOPLE, MR. INFINITY IS A HILARIOUS SCHTICK. ENJOY IT FOR WHAT IT IS.

    Mr. Infinity please keep the posts and blog entries coming, and try to advertise yourself on other sites such as abovethelaw. Good luck to you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everybody knows that Mr. infinity and Mac K are the same person. How come you didn't know?

      Delete
    2. I would actually strongly encourage everyone to watch Mr. Infinity's video, especially if you are even the slightest bit bothered by his presence here. You won't be afterwards. He's a complete pointlessness.

      What a joke. I won't even bother mentioning the fact that the video very clearly demonstrates that he knows nothing about law school or the legal world because he obviously doesn't understand the lawyer recruitment process. He's a troll. Everyone knows that. But he doesn't go to law school and probably doesn't know anyone who does or did. Attention and annoyance are the end goal for him.

      Delete
    3. Arguments aside, the video is hilarious.

      Delete
    4. Did not finish. It is funny at some points. Being unemployed and wanting to work is not funny.

      Delete
  34. 10:30, I'm with you, I definitely want Mr. Inf to carry on posting his blog pieces and videos. Assuming he is in fact a law student or JD (though I have doubts), the lack of wit, literacy or insight on display will only convince more intelligent prospectives that law school is a dodgy investment. So please, Mr. Inf, keep it up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's pretty clear he didn't got to law school. He ridicules the stupidity of looking for a job before taking the bar. Obviously, that's sort of how it works.

      Delete
  35. Mr Infinity is a dullard of well nigh Biblical proportions. He's virtually a parody of specious half baked pro law school arguments.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Ever "skip a question" on a questionnaire?"

    Let me get this straight. They filled out the question saying "JD required," but they did not fill out the section stating their salary?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. For some people that information is private and they don't want to share it.

      Delete
    2. The career services office has discretion to fill in any of the missing data on questionnaires. They almost always fill in "JD Advantage" or "Bar Required" when info about the job justifies that. From what I have seen, there is a fair amount of difference (even within a school) in what jobs are categorized under different headings. For example, if a grad doesn't take the July bar (or fails it) and is working as a "law clerk" at a firm, conscientious offices will report that as "JD preferred"--because bar admission obviously is not required. Others will report it as "bar admission required" because they assume that any law clerk plans to take the bar and that the firm will kick him out if he doesn't ultimately do so and pass.

      Same story with salaries: Career services offices can fill them in if they have adequate information. But here, they are much less likely to have the information--especially for the lower paid jobs.

      Another point that leads to the discrepancies is that salaries are calculated only for FT, long-term (year or more) jobs. Even if a grad reports a salary for a PT or short-term job, that doesn't go into the calculations. So the number of "reportable" salaries is much less than the number of grads with some type of job. And, yup, that's another technique that makes the salary numbers look much better than they really are.

      Delete
    3. Most people do not like to report their salaries. I'll bet if public employees did not have to, they would not do it.

      Delete
  37. LawProf - why can I comment only behind a proxy?

    ReplyDelete
  38. This is slightly off topic - but if the US News law school survey had actually been approached with any rigor - or had the authors sought to actually publish the data that the readers of the USNWR data wanted to see - will this law school give me an education that will be respected by law firms and help me get a good job - the annual report would have been a force for good. And it would have been very easy - and it would not have required interns, just a subscription to Martindale and maybe the Legal, Federal and Corporate Yellow books.

    Criteria No. 1 - largely obtainable using Martindale and the yellow books: Take the previous 40 years of graduates - and in 10 year groups - and two 5 year groups - so in 1990 (when the survey started) the classes of 1950-60, 60-70, 70-80, 80-85 and 85-90 total up for each period the number of students that graduated, and the number listed as practicing lawyers in Martindale and the Yellow books. Then do a separate count of the number of law firm partners, federal judges, legislators, GCs of public companies and GS13 and higher. Use these values as the most important part of the ranking formula - weighting towards the last decade.

    What does this tell you - how many graduates go on to have a reasonably long legal career and how many a reasonably successful one.

    2. Take the list on a state by state basis of attorney discipline - 1 point for an admonishment, 3 point for a suspension 5 for disbarred. Put these in as a negative weighting on the law school.

    3. Take the BLS salary data for the area the law school is in - and subtract average earnings from average lawyers earnings. Calculate tuition as a function of the difference - and apply this to a value metric for the education provided.

    If USNWR had made this the core of its ranking system - it would have been serving its readers and constrained the entire scam rather than engendering it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is probably one of the more useful ideas that I've seen.

      Delete
    2. Except for the typo -


      And it would have been very easy - and it would not have required interns, just a subscription to Martindale and maybe the Legal, Federal and Corporate Yellow books.

      I meant to say could have been done without the unreliable surveys used, but just a bunch of interns to collate data.

      Maybe if say the New York Times was to do such a survey it would have a salutory impact and kill off the USNWR survey? It would be a lot easier now as Martindale and the bars are online with search functions - and I think the Yellow Books too.


      Delete
  39. "The career services office has discretion to fill in any of the missing data on questionnaires."

    lol if this is true.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You know, at this point I don't really doubt it to be true. And, really, how sad is that?

      Delete
  40. My reply to the troll known as "Mr. Infinity"


    http://jdpainterguy.blogspot.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nice photog. Is it edible?

      Delete
  41. ^^ Yes, Mr. Infinity has forced me out of retirement.

    What a spike in views!

    Anyway, it is in for a penny and in for a pound, and the devil take the hindmost in the race to the bottom known as the USA student loan scam.

    Today, Rush Limbaugh mused upon President Obama's inserting the notion of forgiving student loans in some measure, great or small, in "October" as the debates are going on.

    I think that calls for a smiley face :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Link? I'd like to see this.

      Delete
  42. What's in an name?
    Fun with Anagrams!
    My name is an anagram for you-know-who! Maybe it reveals something about his character? Or a certain body part? (Some people read meaning into anagrams, anyway.)

    Another fun one for him is "Femininity Stir".

    Wonder if he has moobs?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Wow I can't believe you people are attacking Mr. Infinity. Let him do his thing; hopefully he goes mainstream.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed. He'll self-destruct spectacularly in about a second which can only really help us.

      Delete
  44. I am not attacking him. Way back when, I offered a hand of friendship and discussion and never wavered from that.

    He seems to have refused that and stil does.

    He even wrote a scathing and rather cruel reply to a 6 figure and obviously emotionally suffering debtor within the last few days.

    Call me crazy in all other respects, but I have always dealt with Infinity in a decent way.

    I just do not want to see new bloggers such as Infinity destroy the work of people that have blogged, and have decided to move on, and are no longer around to defend themselves.


    ReplyDelete
  45. JA Painterguy, shouldn't you be painting houses?

    ReplyDelete
  46. LOL! But if in need, a good tradesman is hard to find!

    And lawyers are a a dime a dozen :)

    ReplyDelete
  47. My parents are worried about phone calls to the house and I hope it is not Mr. Infinity.

    If Mr. Infinity wants to talk to me directly there is no need to bother and worry my old parents.

    Please Mr. Infinity, I am not from bad people and please if you have a bone to pick with either me or Nando or any of the other scambloggers we will gladly meet you face to face and talk.

    What more can I say? But please do not upset my old parents with calls to the house if you have done so.

    We can meet and talk face to face, and that goes for all of the other commenters here.

    If you prove me a fool and destroy me you will have won and proved your position.

    What more can I say?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you have reason to believe a particular person is, in fact, harassing you, the normal procedure is to call the police.

      But, be sure you do have good grounds to do so, of course.

      Delete
  48. Uh, Mr. Infinity appears to be a performance artist.

    ReplyDelete
  49. I also think that Mr. Infinity is the scamblog version of "Ellen Barshevsky".

    It must be a law blog thing.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Mr. Infinity is very angry and has posted some wild shit recently.

    As always I offer conversation, and hope he will come to his senses and sober up, and let's just forget it all.

    In the alternative Mr. Infinity, if still crazy and angry, will shoot me someday, I suppose, because I disagree with him.

    All of us need to sober up in fact, as we are part of a bunch of lives that have been added in with the hops and barley, malt etc.

    ReplyDelete
  51. About Cooley's employment results: http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/interactive/article/20120819/NEWS01/308190102

    ReplyDelete
  52. How do we know if BLS is this far off with other professions? If they get law this eggegiously wrong, what else are they doing?

    ReplyDelete
  53. asking the foxes to guard the chicken coop?
    http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/06/19/law-school-admission-council-to-oversee-reporting-of-undergrad-grades-lsat-scores/

    anyways, i am still waiting for c/o 2015 class profiles across all the LSs. should be interesting

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. LSAC has all the actual data and transcripts.

      Delete
  54. I just watched that Infinity video and read some of his posts. Holy crap! What a dangerous lunatic! And he's an attorney? Or a wannabe attorney? Yikes, that guy sounds like an angry, psychotic stalker who should not be allowed to pass any state's character and fitness test. He describes himself in the third person, circles his name and then draws a circle around other people's names and says he's going to "decimate" them? Sounds like the next Colorado gunman in the making. Why is he taking all of this so personally? If the scam doesn't affect him as he says, why does he care? Clearly, the truth hurts and that's why he feels the need to go on the warpath. This guy needs help. He's dangerous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. time to ignore his dumbass.

      Delete
  55. Someone commented and suggested I ignore Mr.Infinity and remove the posts I have made about him.

    I think I will follow that advice.

    But in case he is dangerous, I just want Mr. Infinity to know that someone from the FBI Criminal Justice Division was reading my posts about him and his threats last night.

    I will remove my posts containing Mr. Infinity's threats against me and my family, but will save a hard copy.

    In addition, I believe I have his IP address.

    ReplyDelete
  56. All in all, we have to admit that - if they're honest (which I doubt) - these NALP statistics don't paint so bad a picture.

    ReplyDelete
  57. i tried to read infinity's blog this morning and it was removed =(. perhaps he has a conscience after all?

    ReplyDelete
  58. I think he was drunk and went on a crazy Mel Gibson type rant and hung himself.

    ReplyDelete
  59. The fundamental reality here is there are not enough jobs. The legal profession is thoroughly glutted with lawyers. There is not enough paying work to go around.

    Of course, a large number of newly minted lawyers will find jobs. A large number will not.

    But the glut of lawyers impacts everyone. Incomes are depressed for all lawyers, because if a given lawyer does not want that low paying job, some other lawyer will. Put you and in a bucket of water; then pull it out and see how big a hole is left in the water.

    I have been on both sides of the hiring table. After going through hundreds of resumes and a dozen interviews for a single opening, I know if the lawyer who is offered the job does not want it, a dozen other lawyers will. There is also little question that most of the lawyers applying for the position would be able to do the work.

    High Plains Lawyer

    ReplyDelete
  60. By the way, the reason LP and DJM have to keep posting is because the law schools continue to lie. These lies cannot go unchallenged.

    If LP and DJM were to stop posting, the law school deans could lie with impunity, much as they did before the arrival of the scamblogs.

    Perhaps if the law schools stopped lying, and told the truth for a change, there would be no need for blogs like this one.

    High Plains Lawyer

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.