The Cost of College v. Payout

I saw this article on Slate, and it resonated with me. As a lawyer, my college loan debt level is approximately $100k. Fortunately, I have a job I like and I make decent (but by no means the mega-bucks Big Law pays) money. Right now, I am looking at paying about $800 a month for the next 10 or 15 years. I had some scholarships, but largely my family simply could not afford to pay for college, so my education was financed by government loans.

One part of the article I noted is the part that discusses the sociology degree and its comparative worth. There are a lot of degress that aren't worth the paper they are printed on in the open market. I remember back to the meetings with my academic advisor - one of the rarest topics was whether the major I picked had any significant employment prospects. The ivory tower academics can provide some very expense and ultiamtely worthless pieces of paper, and even that degress that have value do little to prepare students for their future.

I went through three years of law school, a largely practical education, full of discussions on case law, precedent, argument, and so forth - and my on-the-job training still continues. For degrees like psychology and sociology, at least a Master's level degree is basically required in order to participate fully in the job market - and for jobs that pay $30k to start.

So I add my voice to the chorus - we need to seriously consider revising the seconday education system. The liberal arts education has become a joke. Certainly there are necessary areas that need to be taught - writing, literature, math - but there is an awful lot of fluff in the cirriculum. For example: two credits of physical education - in my case, archery and golf. What a waste of $1,000 (I went to a private undergrad @ $500 a credit hour). Put a joke in here, but my ethics class was a joke too - I learned nothing in it.

There is another aspect too - many of these degrees are basically "toxic" debt - they aren't worth it. Why are we, the taxpayers and goverment, investing in the education of individuals, sometimes to the tune of $200,000 plus, when their chances of paying it off in any reasonable amount of time are zero?

Past, Present, Future

Some days just are not nearly as fulfilling as others.

Today I was tasked with 341 Meetings of Creditors, which is a highly routine event in which the clients meet with the trustee in bankruptcy. For chapter 7 bankruptcies, the ideal outcome is one involving a finding of no assets. There's lots of jargon and etc., but generally most cases are straightforward.

One gets me is how, well, care-worn most of the trustees are. I have met only one trustee who I would classify as even remotely personable. Put it this way: if I was at a bar, sitting at the bar enjoying my drink and watching a game, and any one of most of the trustees I encounter would sit down next to me and order a beer, I would probably get up and move.

Most of them I have met (one exception) just seem, well, sad - careworn, unhappy, and overall miserable.

It worries me, a little bit - what is my future going to be like? Here I am, 25, finally starting my career; where am I going to be, who am I going to be, in ten or fifteen years? If I met the future me know, would I even like me?

I look back at the younger "me's," and I can still see the seeds of the current "me." I might try to talk some sense into my past self, but other than that, I probably wouldn't change a lot.

But if I were to wind up like some of the trustees I meet . . . well, I really don't like that thought.

Musings on Bankruptcy

I was reviewing the number of bankruptcy filings so far this year, and to my surprise there really hasn't been any noticeable increase in them. That mirrors my own observations in the course of my employment, that we haven't had any spike in business. When clients ask about whether we have seen any major spike in business, I do not have any good answer for them.

After thinking on it, I have some thoughts. First, due to the state of the economy, the layoffs, impending foreclosures, and all the other horrible consequences are "long-tail" events. Folks struggle on for a good long time before consulting bankruptcy attorneys. It might be a year or more after someone loses his or her job that she finally thinks of the "b-word." In the mean time, they get harrassed by creditors, struggle to make payments, and generally live in a state of wretched existance.

Why does the "b-word" have such a horrid connotation? In the Northern District of Illinois, we are already on case number 12,000. Twelve Thousand(!) cases filed so far this year, in an area of perhaps 6 million people. That means 0.2% (two-tenths of one percent) of the people have filed for some form of bankruptcy - or 1 in 500. The occurrence is not that uncommon.

Secondly, the damage to one's credit isn't that bad, in the grand scheme of things. Certainly it will be on your credit report for a decade, but if you are at the point where you are considering bankruptcy already, your credit is probably already thoroughly screwed over anyway.

Basically, if someone makes less than the median income for their family size, has no assets with any equity, and can't pay off their debts in the next 2 years, they should be meeting with a bankruptcy attorney now.

Instead, people struggle with the decision, and the terrible connotation of bankruptcy, for months and years, through all the harrassment, aggravation, and the general unpleasantness, for no good reason at all.

A Quasi-Rant on the MPAA

I caught this article today on Sacha Baron Cohen's Bruno. The initial cut of the movie received a NC-17 rating - a death-knell for any wide release movie. Most theatre chains simply won't show an NC-17 movie, period.

Contrast to this piece by Emily Bazelon of Slate, which looks at the Tale of Despereaux and describes it as "too scary" for a G rating.

The rating system starts with G, for General Audience. Next is PG, for parental guidance suggested. Third up in the rating scale is PG-13, strongly cautioning parents, and fourthly is R, for over age 17. NC-17 is everything else.

Now, I am 25 years old, and I look back at my own maturity level at age 17, and I think of how different I look at movies, the world, and just about everything. A huge portion of the movie-going public is age 20+, yet the movie rating system effectively tops out at age 17 - anything too graphic or intense for a 17 year old is lumped in NC-17, an effective purgatory for movies.

What we wind up with, then, is very little market for the upscale, the more mature, and the more intense. I won't even touch on the violence v. sex debate in movies, which is an entirely separate issue.

Why can't a film-maker make a movie with me in mind, without having to tone it down or edit it for the 17 year old version of me? I'm not talking about graphic sexuality, but rather just in the depth of story, the level of maturity, the subject matter of the film, and so on. Movie's like Planet Terror and Sweet Sweetback's Badassss Song come to mind. Even films like American History X and Last Tango in Paris are suggestive that we need to accept the NC-17, or perhaps add another rating, for movies aimed at adults. Other good examples are movies like Casino, Resevoir Dogs, or Rambo IV - those are movies that shouldn't be screened for 17 year olds.

Overall though, the entire rating system needs to be revisited - not only for the filmmakers and the parents, but for the viewing audience. I want movies aimed at me, not at the 17 year old counterpart of me.

Watching the Economy Implode

Watching the news about the economy, and especially the AIG stupidity, it strikes me as amusing to draw parallels between our current socio-economic situation and that of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged.

Now, I am not an objectivist by any means - the views on religion do not suit me, and there generally just seems to be something missing from the theory - but there are a lot of elements in Atlas that ring true.

I think that now, when anyone says anything about the economy, I am going to reply, "Who is John Galt?" and see if anyone catches the reference.

Blogging and Life . . . Life and Blogging

Again and again, life seems to be striving to keep me from posting by keeping me busy and (more or less) happy. My angsty need to post continues to diminish.

As a general note though, I do hope that sooner or later the economy does get fixed, or at least better. I had yet another friend laid off due to economic realities. While I may be a bottom-feeding bankruptcy attorney, and hence virtually immune to economic shifts (or perhaps in the best position to benefit), those I care for and call friend are facing harsher realities.

There is no magic bullet, and I understand that the economic realities are grim, but surely someone somewhere has a solution?

Oh, and one more thing: the new median income numbers for bankruptcy have gone up this month. How the hell that happened I have no idea - but from February to March, the median income for a single person household went up almost $2,000.

Economics makes my brain hurt.

Jim Bunning - /headdesk

First as a law student and now as an attorney, I've always been a fan of Ruth Bader Ginsburg - her opinions have generally showed clarity of thought and a good deal of appreciation for the bottom line, as opposed to some long-winded Founding Fathers interpretation or some off the wall precedent.

I was saddened by her recent illness, and I hope she will recover. The loss of any great legal mind is always painful, and I sincerely hope that Justice Ginsburg will be with us for a long, long time before she goes and joins the Great Bar Association in the Sky.

So, today, we get the wonderful Kentucky jackass Jim Bunning, playing cliche partisan anti-court rhetoric cards and stating that Ginsburg has 9 months to live. He later apologized, but still misspelled Ginsburg's name.

This moron represents his state in the House of Representatives, and he can't even spell the name of a Supreme Court justice right. He is another great example (along with Roland Burris) of why democratic government requires constant vigilance - and also the dark downside of letting everyone's vote count equally.

"Oyez! Oyez! Oyez! [. . .] God Save the United States and this Honorable Court."