First Tier Toilet !

Law School Is

2011-12-04T08:00:00.000-07:00

Ruin, for many (or most).

Law School Is

2011-12-01T06:35:00.001-07:00

A scam? In many cases.

Law School Is

2011-11-14T12:12:00.001-07:00

Overpriced.

A Brief Interview With A Student Debt Activist About OWS

2011-10-12T23:18:00.004-06:00

What follows is a brief interview with C. Cryn Johannsen of All Education Matters about the OWS movement.

1. Why are you getting involved with the "Occupy" movement?

There is an overwhelming number of young people who are driving this movement. Of course, there are people of all ages who are taking a role in the protests, and that's because it is resonating with so many Americans. The saying, "We are the 99%," makes sense. It's a powerful way to identify with other Americans. Many supporters have jobs, are doing well, etc. But they recognize, just like the protesters who have been hit hard financially and so forth, that our system, particularly our financial system, is out of whack.

I have a good friend, Dustin Slaughter, who has been involved with Occupy since it kicked off in lower Manhattan on the 17th of September. Dustin and I have known one another for quite some time, and we are both big supporters of each other's work. (Dustin, incidentally, launched a site called the David & Goliath Project, and is a documentary filmmaker). He's been documenting the protests, and I have used his work on my blog and also in publications for The Loop21.com. Dustin has taken amazing photos of signs about student loan debt and joblessness. The connection between the protests and my work as an advocate for student loan debtors is clear.

I have also been aware of this planned protest since AdBusters made the announcement this past summer. At the same time, October 2011 - a group in D.C. - also made a similar announcement and at the same time. That was not a coincidence. Plus, All Education Matters is listed as an organization that supports the October 2011 crew.

On another note, I literally spoke with hundreds of different types of people - activists like Dustin, authors like Barbara Ehrenreich, professors, debtors, etc. - this past summer about the dismal state of affairs in this country. Dustin, to his credit, in late February was hinting at the need for non-violent, civil disobedience. We had several conversations about it, but at that point I just couldn't seem to figure out HOW we could do it. AdBusters obviously GOT that part! These protests have made me realize that I was not the only person have these conversations. Something was happening at the collective level, and now we're seeing results - we're seeing action ON THE GROUND.

It is clear that people are fed up, and they are mobilizing to show the top 1% that they aren't gonna take it anymore. This movement is absolutely astonishing to me - as for my generation, we haven't seen anything like this before, and I think these young people need our full support. Sure. They might make errors - that's being human - but they are highly engaged, and want to play legitimate role in the political process. They, like most Americans, are tired of feeling shut out.

I think we, as Americans, are coming together for the first time, and we're learning to share our struggles with one another. In addition, I think there is a strong relationship between the 10th anniversary of 9-11 and occupy. And, mind you, I am not referring to the way it is and was exploited by politicians and - even more disgusting - corporations. I think revisiting that day was important. For instance, I spent a lot of time looking at old images and reading about folks who survived or perished that day. I was struck by one thing: how willing Americans were to help one another on that horrific day. The pictures of the firemen, as well as Fr. Mychal Judge (who was listed as the first victim on the ground), were haunting and painful to look at again. I spent a lot of time looking at the firemen walking UP the stairwells in the towers. As they walked up, people walked down. The first responders sacrificed their lives for other people. That's powerful stuff. I think a lot of Americans were reminded of how we can be kind towards one another, that we do still believe in community, and so forth.

I realize that the claim that there is a relationship between the 10th anniversary of 9-11 and occupy can't be "proven" from some social scientific way, but I think there is a definite connection.

So, as you can see, the movement resonates with me for a lot of reasons. I think, most importantly, we need to support the young folks who are out there protesting. As many of us know, they are the ones who are burdened with the most debt and are facing a job market that many economists have compared to the Great Depression. They do not deserve to be ridiculed or dismissed - that has happened for far too long. Like the rest of us, they just want to think they have a future. They want it back. Not only that, they have the guts to hit the streets, risk being injured to make a point. That makes me damned proud. These folks are true patriots, and we need to listen to them. It's time to start listening to one another. I think people who aren't a part of this are still filled with fury. That's because they, like you and me, have felt ignored for too long. It is clear that these events entail a lot of conversation, and I think that's great. When I was observing the mood at Occupy Austin, I was struck by how cheerful it was - people were smiling, there were families there . . . people even brought their dogs (some of which wore signs against corporate greed). It's clear that people are frustrated, but that these gatherings are giving them a sense of hope. Collective hope is a powerful thing - very powerful thing.

I see [these protests] as these radically democratic spaces within a brutal, oligarchic state. That is why, as Naomi Klein recently stated, this is the most important thing happening right now.

2. How are you getting involved?

I am currently trying to raise more funds to travel to various cities in the Heartland and the South to report about the protests. I was one of the first to report that the movement was spreading nationwide, and I think stories about how occupy is in these traditionally conservative states is worthy of attention. I also want to push against the way in which corporate media are trying to characterize the protesters and their demands. I have to draw a fine line between my work as an activist and my work as a freelance journalist. That's to say, I will report in an objective manner, so if I discover problematic things about the protests I attend, I will write about that.

But I have also played a role in helping folks disseminate information from various occupied cities across the U.S. That's just one way of helping out - that's being an engaged activist who cares about her fellow Americans.

In addition, I have prepared fliers for protesters to take to their local protests. These fliers are about my non-profit - I want the indebted folks to know that there is someone who works 6-7 days a week for them. That's my role as an activist. I created these fliers at the request of several people, and I know that they have printed these materials off and shared them with fellow protesters.

I am also writing a book about the student lending crisis (I have a wonderful literary agent who is working her tail off to sell my book). This movement will definitely be part of the narrative.

So, the movement is yet another way in which we - and that includes the scambloggers - can raise further awareness about the student lending crisis, the law school scam, etc. It's becoming easier to spread the word now that people are hitting the streets and sharing information with lots of folks on the ground. I am very grateful to these people -without them, AEM would not be alive and growing.

I also have plans to head to NYC. I am definitely going to D.C., but am currently working on a trip to lower Manhattan.

3. Do you see any relation between your fight for education reform and the OWS movement?

Yes. Absolutely. I think I answered that in the first two questions!

4. What do you think the goal of these demonstrations ultimately is, if there is no "concrete set of demands," as critics say?

You know, it's hard to say at this point. I think they are being very smart about NOT setting concrete demands at this point. To be sure, if you go to Occupy Wall Street's site, you will see a set of demands. But all the various cities that have seen strong turn outs - L.A., Chicago, Denver, Boston, etc. - have their own set of demands and desires. We're seeing radical democracy at its best. They are also avoiding being co-opted, and that is the strength in shying away from demands and nominating leaders (the movement is described as "leaderless"). I agree with a lot of older activists on these two things: I think it's smart and makes sense.

Again, this gets back to the youth who are part of this movement. They are learning things, and this movement is THEIR own. As I said, it's obviously not just young folks, but they are certainly driving it. We are not here to judge them. Plus, it is happening in such a different time than, for instance, the civil rights movement. As an older gentleman, who was involved in those protests, recently said to me, "that was a different period of time. Plus, we had to rely on telephones and meeting people face-to-face. This is different, with the Internet and social media. Plus, there was an obvious set of demands for the civil rights movement. That is not the case with this."

I absolutely agree with him.

Besides, this movement just got started. Who knows how it will grow in the next coming months and years? It is clear: the protesters are realizing that their relationships with one another will be long-term, and that means the movement is here to stay.

5. Should the universities be occupied? Why or why not?

Yes. Absolutely. Last week there was a call to Occupy Colleges, and at noon on Thursday (if memory serves me) students across the nation were urged to walk out in solidarity with occupy. This happened, and I know that protests against tuition hikes are occurring in Berkeley again. (The hashtag, incidentally, for this side of it is: #occupycolleges). I think we need to reach out to these students, because when they graduate - if things remain like they are or worsen - they are gonna need as much support as they can get. That's why our work is important. It will let them know they are not alone in their struggle. Occupy offers that space as well.

Occupy the Universities (and Sallie Mae, and Wall Street)

2011-10-02T05:35:00.008-06:00

The "Occupy _____" demonstrations are a symbolic statement from the people against a degenerating system that no longer bears any semblance to its once meritocratic ethos. No, there is no concrete set of demands. Does there need to be? For too long we have said nothing.

Now it is not only the large banks that have reaped an inordinate share of the national wealth. It is also the universities who routinely rip off and deceive their most significant stakeholders, the students. The tuition rates are now at absurd levels, and they have of course no relation to the starting salaries that graduates can expect.

Every semester, the student population has no choice but to pay up. Why? To redemocratize our society, we have to fully democratize our education system. Students are not passive consumers. The university system must be transformed into one where the students have a voice, as it is in most developed countries and even in many far-from-developed countries.

So, yes, occupy Wall Street, occupy Sallie Mae, but also occupy the authoritarian universities that are milking you dry.

Those in charge have almost guaranteed "access" to higher education, but at a cost. Who benefits when universities pump out an excessive number of underemployed graduates? The students and their families do not. Society does not, for it would have been better served to have labor allocated in a more productive fashion.

But the usurers benefit. The deans benefit. The arrogant professoriat benefits.

Some in the education reform camp favor eliminating state involvement in tertiary education altogether. Others just want to see student loans discharged in bankruptcy.

Yet perhaps we should consider a system that takes into account the needs of society in determining who attends which institution. Perhaps we should eliminate the price factor altogether. Education is not merely a matter of consumer choice, if it is at all. It is a matter of social utility, and ultimately of the national interest.

It Can't Go On Like This

2011-09-10T03:38:00.008-06:00

Even as the students' and graduates' movement gains force and credibility in that our concerns have been validated by the establishment press and by some figures in the corrupt, parasitic university system, we cannot lose sight of the fact that this fight is about more than just "raising awareness."

We knew we were fucked a long time ago. While this may have been news to our elders, it was a truism for us. Yes, I recognize that there are exceptions. Some of our peers, particularly before we gained mainstream credibility, tried to tarnish us in the hope that they could gain favor with those who hold the golden keys to success. Whenever any suffering grad or student would air her concerns to the press, these turncoats would lambaste and humiliate her, ensuring that fewer would publicly air their grievances in the future. The overeducated/underemployed/"indebtured" class can only defend themselves against a relentless assault on their standard of living by standing united.

Those starting law school this week should know that their schools are cooking the books and ripping them off. Is it time then to pack up our bags and stop writing? NO! Why not? Because the goal is not just to inform but to change the education system from one where students are robbed of their future to one where students hope to gain a better future for themselves. From a system that exists to enrich a parasitic clique, to one that exists for all its stakeholders. And who are the biggest stakeholders but the students themselves?

It's time for students to demand the democratization of their universities, and for graduates to demand a fair deal. Forget about having a clinical "debate" or "discussion" with those who stuff their pockets with our dreams. I have nothing more to say to them, and, in fact, I refuse to address them as moral equals.

We will win eventually. I am sure of it. Because things can't go on like this.

"Inside the Law School Scam" Author Receives Veiled Threats, Backs Down

2011-08-14T11:17:00.008-06:00

The new blog Inside the Law School Scam has garnered much support from law graduates and much venom from law professors. The author of the blog claims to be a law professor, and he has already received threats from that silver-tongued mafia which runs the dirty businesses that are American law schools.

His latest entry, entitled "Another Perspective," is a step in the wrong direction in that it diminishes the impact of the author's previous claims. In this post, the author allows another individual to reclaim the glory of the professoriat. The good that comes from this post is that it reveals the petty viciousness of the beasts who operate these institutions. It is entirely possible that the blog is a hoax, but the reaction from the privileged and parasitic sections of this profession illustrate what we are up against.

I quote from "Brian Leiter's Law School Reports":

It was obvious to me after reading the blog, with its reckless and inaccurate generalizations (cf. Paul Horwitz's commentary), since the author has written in this vein under his own name in the past. And the clues as to his identity the author provided--the number of years in teaching, best law school in his state, a "tier 1" law school, etc., as well as the interview he gave--just confirmed that impression. Since he teaches at a state law school, and in a state that has shown it is willing to fire tenured faculty under the right circumstances, I am somewhat amazed he would do this, since the blog is tantamount to an admission that he is not really doing his job and doesn't deserve his salary . . . . More seriously, when his identity becomes public, as seems inevitable given how poorly he has disguised it, he will have humiliated his colleagues and his school, neither of which deserve his latest exercise in seeking the limelight. I hope he has the good sense to just delete the whole thing before he makes things worse.

This author then goes on to praise the latest "Inside the Law School Scam" entry:

I'm glad to see he's already starting to back-pedal on some of his irresponsible rhetoric, perhaps because, as I know from my e-mail, some of his colleagues already suspect he's behind it.

Even if the guy removes his blog, we already know that students are being bled dry for no good reason. The nasty language directed at him is utterly useless.

Chilean Students Stand Up For Themselves While American Students Go Back to Sleep!

2011-08-12T14:10:00.009-06:00

The students of Chile are putting up a brave fight for education reform. Like in the United States, the education system in Chile leaves many graduates deeply in debt. Like in the United States, students are bled dry by these "nonprofit" parasites.

Now let's take a look at developments in America. Although a few students are raising their voices as individuals, some even suing the universities that conned them out of their fortunes and futures, we have yet to see students and graduates rally for education reform in the States. This is so even though the American education system is the most cruel, cynical, and costly in the civilized world.

It's not just about "the law school scam." Universities are charging higher and higher fees while post-graduation outcomes get shittier and shittier.

It's an outrage. But, wait a minute, it's August! Shouldn't you be paying your $35,000 tuition fees? Ah, yes. We can blog all we want about it, but as long as the deans keep the cash rolling in, none of it matters.

Law Professor Confirms That Law School Scam Extends to the First Tier

2011-08-09T11:49:00.003-06:00

A new blog has appeared on my blog roll. It's called "Inside the Law School Scam," and its author claims to be a tenured law professor from a first tier toilet (though one that has a lower rank than my T14 alma mater). This blog has already earned itself an article on Inside Higher Ed. (That was awfully quick.)

There have already been attempts to "out" the anonymous writer of the blog. Why? Whether we're talking about a first tier toilet or a third tier toilet, the stench is the same when both schools in both tiers are publishing lies about their graduates' employment outcomes and routinely ripping off their students. Yes, my T14 charged over $40,000 a year so that deans and tenured professors can glad-hand us and live carefree lives at our expense. And what about the speeches they give about "justice" and "the law?" Laughable.

It's time for the overpaid, thieving high priests of tertiary education to tell the truth. I welcome this new blog as an attempt to blow the lid off the can of bullshit that is legal education. I just hope it's authentic and that the good work lasts.

Things Are Going to Hell

2011-08-08T12:40:00.003-06:00

. . . and law school is not a refuge. Definitely not. Don't let the parasites enrich themselves at your expense.

The idea of tens of thousands of enrolling in law school this September is horrifying. It's just totally insane. Yeah, it's still a swindle. A big con.

Teach Your Children!

2011-07-20T13:42:00.005-06:00

I spent some time recently with a young relative of mine who is about to start high school. He knows about the enormous difficulty many young law school grads have in finding suitable employment. He knows about the law school scam. But how much does he really know about the job market for university graduates in general? What follows is a paraphrased conversation.

Knut: Don't go to law school.
Young Relative: Don't worry, Knut. I don't even want to be a lawyer.
Knut: Good.
Young Relative: Yeah, I'm thinking about going into politics.
Knut: Well, it's not that easy to do that. You need to have access to a lot of money and connections to run.
Young Relative: No, I was thinking more along the lines of international politics.
Knut: You mean . . . You mean something like the United Nations?
Young Relative: Yeah. I want to help the world.

Yes, I know that he has not even begun high school, but it is time for parents to tell their children the truth. Almost none of these children will grow up to be baseball players, rock stars, congressmen, tycoons, ambassadors, and Hollywood filmmakers.

Do philosophy majors graduate to become philosophers? Do political science majors graduate to become important politicians? Do history majors become historians? The job market is an ugly, brutal place. Young people must learn to put aside their childish fantasies immediately. Holding onto these delusional thoughts can result in toxic debt, perpetual underemployment, and worse. And no, don't "do what you love." Don't "follow your dream." What dream? Our dreams were on life support when the white-collar sector started getting squeezed; and those in charge pulled the plug in 2008. Forget it. Try to find a stable job that can provide you with the opportunity to get by, to start a family. Work hard. Study. Read. But look at the job market realistically.

Parents, teach your children, lest they join the legion of university or law school graduate stocking shelves for minimum wage.

NYT Uses Story of Youth Underemployment to Push for Further Cuts in Living Standards

2011-01-02T05:04:00.000-07:00

The New York Times published an article entitled "Lack of Jobs in Southern Europe Frustrates the Young" to the front page of its website on New Year's Day. At first glance, I was happy to see the concerns of the overeducated and underemployed being publicized. However, the title of the article troubled me for two reasons:

1) The issue is not limited to Southern Europe, and
2) It is not merely frustration that this problem generates.

The article starts out strongly:

It galled her that even with her competence and fluency in five languages, it was nearly impossible to land a paying job. Working as an unpaid trainee lawyer was bad enough, she thought, but doing it at Italy’s social security administration seemed too much. She not only worked for free on behalf of the nation’s elderly, who have generally crowded out the young for jobs, but her efforts there did not even apply to her own pension. [Emphasis added]

But instead of focusing on the real causes for the uncertainty of the social position of the young and educated, the authors prefer to blame the elderly, the unions, and, of course, the Chinese.

Giuliano Amato, an economist and former Italian prime minister, was even more blunt. “By now, only a few people refuse to understand that youth protests aren’t a protest against the university reform, but against a general situation in which the older generations have eaten the future of the younger ones,” he recently told Corriere della Sera, Italy’s largest newspaper. [Emphasis added]

Yes, that's it. The young are not really protesting against being screwed by those in charge, but are in fact protesting against their parents, many of whom are also in an increasingly precarious situation. It has absolutely nothing to do with the widening social divide, the travesty of the financial crisis, the political response to it.

Even before the economic crisis hit, Southern Europe was not an easy place to forge a career. Low growth and a corrosive lack of meritocracy have long posed challenges to finding a job in Italy, Greece, Spain and Portugal. Today, with the added sting of austerity, more people are left fighting over fewer opportunities. It is a zero-sum game that inevitably pits younger workers struggling to enter the labor market against older ones already occupying precious slots.

Perfect words for the complacent Upper East Side NYT reader to pat himself on the back. See how bad they have it in those lazy old Mediterranean countries?

Nevermind that those Italian graduates only had to pay relatively nominal sums to earn those degrees and that the outlook for American graduates is arguably far worse.

“What we have is a Ponzi scheme,” said Lawrence Kotlikoff, an economist at Boston University and an expert in fiscal policy. He said that pay-as-you-go social security and health care were a looming fiscal disaster in Southern Europe and beyond. “If these fertility rates continue through time, you won’t have Italians, Spanish, Greeks, Portuguese or Russians,” he said. “I imagine the Chinese will just move into Southern Europe.” [Emphasis added]

Ah, yes. The good old Ponzi scheme! No speech and agenda to slash benefits, pensions, and labor protections is adequate without this misnomer. Then we have this comical attempt to bring the Chinese into this! But who pushed for trade relations with China? Who brought China into the WTO telling us that everyone would benefit remarkably? No, don't ask yourselves those questions. It's much better to encourage xenophobia against the Chinese people, much of whom is just as overeducated and underemployed (or exploited ruthlessly to fill the Waltons' pockets, for example).

The authors then go on a rampage against labor unions and their associated parties:

Yet many young people in Southern Europe see labor union leaders like Mr. Fernández, and the left-wing parties with which they have been historically close, as part of the problem. They are seen as exacerbating a two-tier labor market by protecting a caste of tenured older workers rather than helping younger workers enter the market.

For Dr. Kotlikoff, the solution is simple: “We have to change the labor laws. Not gradually, but quickly.”

"Many young people"? Could this be the New York Times' equivalent of Fox News' "some people say?" Can someone tell "Dr." Kotlikoff and the New York Times what happened when the French tried to oh-so-altruistically change the labor laws for the wondrous benefit of the French underemployed? Shame on the French youth for not knowing what's good for them!

But that's not all. The article concludes in a most despicable manner. It takes the issue of raising the retirement age (done to inequitably apportion the cost of the financial crisis and its subsequent clean-up) and frames it as something the young underemployed want:

“Now people are being sent into early retirement at age 55,” said Sara Sanfulgencio, 28, who has a master’s degree in marketing but is unemployed and living in Madrid with her mother, who owns a children’s shoe store. “But if I haven’t started working by age 28 and I already have to stop at 55, it’s absurd.”

So in the world of the New York Times, young overeducated workers want to work longer, with smaller pensions (if any) and with fewer labor protections. Unbelievable. If this is so, then how do the NYT and the Manhattan cocktail party circuit explain the prominent involvement among the young in every single anti-austerity movement in Europe? Next week, the New York Times will tell us that British students will actually benefit from higher tuition fees.

This is but a cheap attempt to turn a serious socioeconomic issue into an opportunity to propagandize for further undercutting the living standards of the majority of the population.

My Introduction

2010-12-30T07:43:00.001-07:00

Note: This piece was originally published at the outset of this blog in June of 2010. I republish it with slight edits for new First Tier Toilet fans and for nostalgics.

I am starting this blog because I want to give underemployed college graduates the full picture regarding law school. The education industry continues to present manipulated data as fact to prospective students. The entertainment industry portrays the legal profession as a prestigious or glamorous profession.

I graduated with decent grades from a very highly-ranked "elite" [edit: T14] law school. I am good at networking. I have a strong resume, of which I am proud. In short, I "did everything right." This is not to say that I am entitled to anything but to show that there is more at issue than personal effort. There is a systemic problem in the legal education system. I am in a better situation both financially and job-wise than most of my friends [edit: not really anymore], so I cannot be accused here of doing this out of envy or bitterness. The vast majority of graduates from my school did not get serious job offers. Many of those who would otherwise be officially unemployed are working at the law library for $16 an hour or are working as temporary employees for a stipend and therefore show up as "employed." Most of the 2009 summer associates did not get offers, as far as I know; but even the few who did get offers are not as lucky as you would imagine. They will most likely leave the firms within six years, or they will be laid off. [Edit: No, they don't all "lateral" as partners in lower-ranked firms]. The lucky ones are the ones who got into the government. This, however, is not a back-up plan. Government agencies are now swamped with applications from Harvard and Yale students, with good reason. [Edit: The political situation has diminished the possibility of robust government hiring thanks to tax cuts and budget slashing pressures].

The problems facing the legal industry are not new, and you can find great summations of these problems at other blogs by young attorneys. We do have to consider outsourcing, digitization, and large corporations' recent reluctance to pay top-rate for work billed by associates. However, we also have to look at the reasons 0Ls have for choosing law school. They come out of college working dead-end jobs. They have no direction. They feel that they cannot move up in life without another degree. This is especially the case for liberal arts grads, but it also extends to those who majored in more useful fields. I will not say that life is great for college graduates. I know the employment figures. I know what the job situation is like. But believe me when I tell you that the situation for law graduates is even worse. Do not think that it will magically get better. All the problems that we are facing now originated during pre-crisis times. The crisis just accelerated the inevitable.

College graduates will continue to apply to law school in droves because they feel that their situation is hopeless otherwise. Surely, life could not be any worse with an additional degree. This is where they are wrong. A law degree can serve as an employment straitjacket. At worst, it is financial ruin. Law school is the easiest graduate professional program to get into, and it still does carry some "prestige" to laypeople. This prestige, sadly, does not buy you a sandwich.