Toxic Debt & No Intrinsic Value (i.e., Your J.D.)

Sorry to interrupt the usual psychopath vs. narcissist comment flame war on here . . .

Strike One of the J.D.: Toxic Debt

There ought to be more discussion of the nature of debt that law graduates "incur" in their "studies". The toxicity of Student loan debt is more dangerous than the media lets on: it is not just the amount but the manner of debt that kills. It is more deadly than slowly taking a bubble bath in pure quicksilver without so much as rinsing off afterwards. Student loan debt is a deadly added burden to law grads, even well-employed ones. It is one thing to lose one's savings—even a gamblin' fool, walking into a casino and losing his "investment", may still walk out without debt. So he is "even Steven" , as gambling debts are not legally enforceable. The legal structure we live under gives total immunity to gambling debts, but no mercy to student ones! LOL . . .They can't touch Gamblin' Bob, but TTT goody-two-shoes is screwed! Totes ratchid, d00d. No "MyEdAccount" or ICRP for Gamblin' Bob. His net value is $0.00, which is bad for his future retirement plan, but at least is better than a jobless J.D. holder's -$200,000.

The debt is toxic most of all because it is nondischargeable—there is no escape or excuse from paying it. Only the fact that debtor's prison no longer exists is in the indebted TTTT flaw stupent's favor. It is further toxic because a third party (the guvmint) paid the actual tuition and wishes to collect it back; the "tuition" was really not chosen by the future debtor. The student loan slave is even worse off than that "degenerate gambler" that lost every hand at poker on borrowed money and had to give his son's SUV to Tony Soprano's daughter avoid getting kneecapped. At least the degenerate gambler got to play with the money he borrowed—he was connected to the money and could ask for as little or much as he wanted, and had a chance to win. The law graduate does not even really get to handle the money; he never even sees it. It is all owed by him though, and he must pay the inflated tuition because of governmental student loan guarantees allows law schools to raise tuition to whatever they please; the graduate is then stuck in an unavoidable onslaught of debt since the government has the power (unlike a casino) to legally enforce its debt. Currently policy makes student loan debt immune from even a total bankruptcy claim.

Strike Two & Three: Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Value 

A law degree, like any other credential, has both potential intrinsic & extrinsic value. A good degree (i.e., not law) has both: intrinsic value that gives the student a more developed mind for his long-term benefit, and extrinsic, consisting of useful training which society values and is willing to pay the graduate for. Uh-oh! 

We already know that law school does not teach you to practice law! (i.e., actually be a productive member of the profession). At least a philosophy degree teaches you "how to reason" or at the least, to cite depressing aphorisms from Schopenhauer to bide you through your unemployment. A J.D. does not even provide that much. But the degree lacks extrinsic value too, as has been discussed many times; it cannot get half of its graduates a job nor keep the few with jobs initially gainfully employed long enough to make the inflated "tuition" debt worthwhile. 

So we see that a law degree carries toxic debt while lacking both intrinsic & extrinsic value. Which leads to the disturbing and contempuous-laden question: Why are they still going to law school at all?

____________________________________________________________
My book-length satire/exposé of law school, Smarter Than Socrates: The End of the Law School Era.