Thursday, January 2, 2014

Brian Leiter Slam Dunks Scambloggers...Again

A common theme of this blog is that scambloggers have lost all rationality and perspective, and completely missed the subtle grace and beauty of the legal education business model.

As a fitting first post of 2014, I give you Brian Leiter's piece on "Cyber-Hysteria."  This is such a lucid explanation of the whiny scamblogger psyche that it couldn't be contained on his ordinary blog.  Oh, no; it's on HuffPost.
The cyber-hysteria about law schools is not only tediously repetitive, it is immune to facts or evidence. That became clear last summer when Michael Simkovic, a law professor, and Frank McIntyre, a labor economist, conducted the first systematic study of economic outcomes for those with a JD compared to students with similar credentials who only earned a B.A. The results were unambiguous: students who earned a J.D. earned substantially more than their B.A. counterparts at almost every level of the income distribution; even the 25th percentile earners fared better. The cyber-mob counseled against earning a J.D. without offering any other guidance; yet the best evidence on offer, from Professors Simkovic and McIntyre, demonstrated that a J.D. was a good financial investment for the vast majority over the long term.
Unambiguous.  Facts.  And there's a Nietzsche quote.  

I don't know why the whiny JDU crowd even bothers.  With a thunderous click of his mouse, Leiter just wiped out six months of scamblogging efforts.  And that's a fact.


  1. You got spanked hard by Leiter because he studies Nietzsche instead of all those legal minutiae that the unemployed JDs insisted on studying. That makes him vastly more intelligent than anyone else. You don't mess with Leiter!

  2. Always bringing a smile to my face, LSTC.

  3. Leiter is the perfect example of a law school professor: having scrambled back into academia as quickly as he possibly could after law school graduation, he now earns a six-figure or more income offering his untested opinions to others. It is typical for con artists to defend their cons, why should law schools and the professors who help them market their particular brand of snake oil be any different.