[bearishgurl]

[quote=eavesdropper]…Very often the parents have also put themselves at extreme risk by remortgaging their homes to the point of foreclosure, depleting their retirement savings, and maxing out a dozen credit cards to deal with their child’s demands and financial screw-ups…[/quote]

Great post, eavesdropper. As to the above, I’ve seen a LOT of this in recent years, done mostly for “children” (aged 30-40) and their children (grandchildren of near-retirees). These “codependent” parents have virtually, in some cases, rendered themselves near-destitute in their looming retirement years financially “helping” their able-bodied adult children. After being widowed w/o life insurance, divorced one or more times or never-married with multiple children, these “adult children” move back to their parent(s) home or even live in an RV or small granny flat on their parent(s) property, using their (often “better”) address for school attendance purposes and using the parents home for laundry, cooking, hot showers, cable TV purposes, etc. The returning kid (now parent) typically comes “back home” with no job, no assets, expensive cell phone contracts for they and their child(ren), maxed out CC’s, car payments and sometimes even student loans they have deferred into oblivion.

The boomer parent(s), now 60+, were often newly retired or just on the brink of retiring from their often longtime jobs when they received all these needy family members back into their homes for a “temporary” stay (ostensibly to “get their feet back on the ground”) which ends up turning into years. The parent can’t downsize (too many people) and move to that 2 br cabin in the sticks they’ve dreamed about now (proximity to schools an issue) or travel, which they may have been waiting their whole lives for without upending their minor grandchildren’s (previously unstable) lives.

In almost every domestic (dissolution) case in SD County that I’ve prepared forms/pleading on since 2000, one or both parties stated to the court that they were moving in with friends/relatives indefinitely.

I’ve also seen in recent years MULTIPLE married couples under the age of 40 being deeded (FREE AND CLEAR) land, houses, a duplex and a small biz commercial property by one of their still-alive parents, only to almost immediately mortgage it into oblivion solely to extract cash and continue to use the property, live in it or collect rent from it. They typically made 3-7 mtg payments and then let it slip into foreclosure.

In the case of one vacant lot, the couple actually DID build a 4 bdrm house on it, but contracted the work themselves and did not grade the lot properly. As you can well imagine, they had MANY problems during rains and with getting in/out of the property, etc. They eventually lived as long as they could in it (after attempting to sell it for $1.4M w/no price reductions) before succumbing to foreclosure.

Cost of 2 AC Lot: $0 (deeded 2001)
Cost of Plans: $900 (nine hundred)
Cost of Mat’ls: $138K
Cost of Permits: $21K
Cost of Engineering: $0 (but should have hired one)

Total of loans taken out by couple by 2006: $996K (1st, 2nd, HELOC)

Length of ownership: 5.5 yrs (incl vacant lot)
Length of mtg-free living before losing property: 13 mos.

When this “party” was over, the couple promptly filed (Chap 7) BK and divorced (his 2nd/her 3rd). They share two kids. He moved into one BR apt and she moved (where else?) back in with “mom” (now widowed) with her now 4 “pt time” children (3 minors) after already receiving her own parents land which had been in their family for many years and squandering it.

Current age of couple: abt 42
Current age of mom: abt 69

No, I did NOT do any domestic legal work for this “land-gift” couple!!

I’m not saying ALL the “under 40” generation is like this. But why should a typical older parent who is cutting corners by doing all their own household work and gardening, wearing clothes mostly given to them, not buying any disposable items and rationing gas and utils in order to live within their means feel compelled to take on the responsibility of an adult child who repeatedly digs their own grave? ALL of these young couples’ problems were caused from gross overspending due to grandiose and unrealistic expectations given their educational and professional “station” in life. I don’t believe the majority of older boomers and the WWII generation (who typically married young) have or had these HUGE expectations in housing, vehicles, public or private schools, etc, while raising children.

These young families COULD have had a better quality of life and kept so much more of their earnings and assets were it not due to their constant WASTEFUL expenditures and and an all-too-prevalent “disposable” mindset.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=eavesdropper]…Very often the parents have also put themselves at extreme risk by remortgaging their homes to the point of foreclosure, depleting their retirement savings, and maxing out a dozen credit cards to deal with their child’s demands and financial screw-ups…[/quote]

Great post, eavesdropper. As to the above, I’ve seen a LOT of this in recent years, done mostly for “children” (aged 30-40) and their children (grandchildren of near-retirees). These “codependent” parents have virtually, in some cases, rendered themselves near-destitute in their looming retirement years financially “helping” their able-bodied adult children. After being widowed w/o life insurance, divorced one or more times or never-married with multiple children, these “adult children” move back to their parent(s) home or even live in an RV or small granny flat on their parent(s) property, using their (often “better”) address for school attendance purposes and using the parents home for laundry, cooking, hot showers, cable TV purposes, etc. The returning kid (now parent) typically comes “back home” with no job, no assets, expensive cell phone contracts for they and their child(ren), maxed out CC’s, car payments and sometimes even student loans they have deferred into oblivion.

The boomer parent(s), now 60+, were often newly retired or just on the brink of retiring from their often longtime jobs when they received all these needy family members back into their homes for a “temporary” stay (ostensibly to “get their feet back on the ground”) which ends up turning into years. The parent can’t downsize (too many people) and move to that 2 br cabin in the sticks they’ve dreamed about now (proximity to schools an issue) or travel, which they may have been waiting their whole lives for without upending their minor grandchildren’s (previously unstable) lives.

In almost every domestic (dissolution) case in SD County that I’ve prepared forms/pleading on since 2000, one or both parties stated to the court that they were moving in with friends/relatives indefinitely.

I’ve also seen in recent years MULTIPLE married couples under the age of 40 being deeded (FREE AND CLEAR) land, houses, a duplex and a small biz commercial property by one of their still-alive parents, only to almost immediately mortgage it into oblivion solely to extract cash and continue to use the property, live in it or collect rent from it. They typically made 3-7 mtg payments and then let it slip into foreclosure.

In the case of one vacant lot, the couple actually DID build a 4 bdrm house on it, but contracted the work themselves and did not grade the lot properly. As you can well imagine, they had MANY problems during rains and with getting in/out of the property, etc. They eventually lived as long as they could in it (after attempting to sell it for $1.4M w/no price reductions) before succumbing to foreclosure.

Cost of 2 AC Lot: $0 (deeded 2001)
Cost of Plans: $900 (nine hundred)
Cost of Mat’ls: $138K
Cost of Permits: $21K
Cost of Engineering: $0 (but should have hired one)

Total of loans taken out by couple by 2006: $996K (1st, 2nd, HELOC)

Length of ownership: 5.5 yrs (incl vacant lot)
Length of mtg-free living before losing property: 13 mos.

When this “party” was over, the couple promptly filed (Chap 7) BK and divorced (his 2nd/her 3rd). They share two kids. He moved into one BR apt and she moved (where else?) back in with “mom” (now widowed) with her now 4 “pt time” children (3 minors) after already receiving her own parents land which had been in their family for many years and squandering it.

Current age of couple: abt 42
Current age of mom: abt 69

No, I did NOT do any domestic legal work for this “land-gift” couple!!

I’m not saying ALL the “under 40” generation is like this. But why should a typical older parent who is cutting corners by doing all their own household work and gardening, wearing clothes mostly given to them, not buying any disposable items and rationing gas and utils in order to live within their means feel compelled to take on the responsibility of an adult child who repeatedly digs their own grave? ALL of these young couples’ problems were caused from gross overspending due to grandiose and unrealistic expectations given their educational and professional “station” in life. I don’t believe the majority of older boomers and the WWII generation (who typically married young) have or had these HUGE expectations in housing, vehicles, public or private schools, etc, while raising children.

These young families COULD have had a better quality of life and kept so much more of their earnings and assets were it not due to their constant WASTEFUL expenditures and and an all-too-prevalent “disposable” mindset.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=eavesdropper]…Very often the parents have also put themselves at extreme risk by remortgaging their homes to the point of foreclosure, depleting their retirement savings, and maxing out a dozen credit cards to deal with their child’s demands and financial screw-ups…[/quote]

Great post, eavesdropper. As to the above, I’ve seen a LOT of this in recent years, done mostly for “children” (aged 30-40) and their children (grandchildren of near-retirees). These “codependent” parents have virtually, in some cases, rendered themselves near-destitute in their looming retirement years financially “helping” their able-bodied adult children. After being widowed w/o life insurance, divorced one or more times or never-married with multiple children, these “adult children” move back to their parent(s) home or even live in an RV or small granny flat on their parent(s) property, using their (often “better”) address for school attendance purposes and using the parents home for laundry, cooking, hot showers, cable TV purposes, etc. The returning kid (now parent) typically comes “back home” with no job, no assets, expensive cell phone contracts for they and their child(ren), maxed out CC’s, car payments and sometimes even student loans they have deferred into oblivion.

The boomer parent(s), now 60+, were often newly retired or just on the brink of retiring from their often longtime jobs when they received all these needy family members back into their homes for a “temporary” stay (ostensibly to “get their feet back on the ground”) which ends up turning into years. The parent can’t downsize (too many people) and move to that 2 br cabin in the sticks they’ve dreamed about now (proximity to schools an issue) or travel, which they may have been waiting their whole lives for without upending their minor grandchildren’s (previously unstable) lives.

In almost every domestic (dissolution) case in SD County that I’ve prepared forms/pleading on since 2000, one or both parties stated to the court that they were moving in with friends/relatives indefinitely.

I’ve also seen in recent years MULTIPLE married couples under the age of 40 being deeded (FREE AND CLEAR) land, houses, a duplex and a small biz commercial property by one of their still-alive parents, only to almost immediately mortgage it into oblivion solely to extract cash and continue to use the property, live in it or collect rent from it. They typically made 3-7 mtg payments and then let it slip into foreclosure.

In the case of one vacant lot, the couple actually DID build a 4 bdrm house on it, but contracted the work themselves and did not grade the lot properly. As you can well imagine, they had MANY problems during rains and with getting in/out of the property, etc. They eventually lived as long as they could in it (after attempting to sell it for $1.4M w/no price reductions) before succumbing to foreclosure.

Cost of 2 AC Lot: $0 (deeded 2001)
Cost of Plans: $900 (nine hundred)
Cost of Mat’ls: $138K
Cost of Permits: $21K
Cost of Engineering: $0 (but should have hired one)

Total of loans taken out by couple by 2006: $996K (1st, 2nd, HELOC)

Length of ownership: 5.5 yrs (incl vacant lot)
Length of mtg-free living before losing property: 13 mos.

When this “party” was over, the couple promptly filed (Chap 7) BK and divorced (his 2nd/her 3rd). They share two kids. He moved into one BR apt and she moved (where else?) back in with “mom” (now widowed) with her now 4 “pt time” children (3 minors) after already receiving her own parents land which had been in their family for many years and squandering it.

Current age of couple: abt 42
Current age of mom: abt 69

No, I did NOT do any domestic legal work for this “land-gift” couple!!

I’m not saying ALL the “under 40” generation is like this. But why should a typical older parent who is cutting corners by doing all their own household work and gardening, wearing clothes mostly given to them, not buying any disposable items and rationing gas and utils in order to live within their means feel compelled to take on the responsibility of an adult child who repeatedly digs their own grave? ALL of these young couples’ problems were caused from gross overspending due to grandiose and unrealistic expectations given their educational and professional “station” in life. I don’t believe the majority of older boomers and the WWII generation (who typically married young) have or had these HUGE expectations in housing, vehicles, public or private schools, etc, while raising children.

These young families COULD have had a better quality of life and kept so much more of their earnings and assets were it not due to their constant WASTEFUL expenditures and and an all-too-prevalent “disposable” mindset.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=lifeisgood]I love this website for the different points of view on the housing market. I think it is hilarious that whenever there is a topic describing housing tumoil, it is always broad and hardly ever specific to San Diego. I really don’t care what is going on in Nevada or any other state for that matter. Any time there is an article written about the San Diego housing market stabilizing, a lot of people on this board tear it up and say that there is an endless amount of data against this idea. I’m not saying that we will see extreme increases in SD home values, but I am suggesting that there are a lot of areas of San Diego that have slightly increased in value or are stable. That is just the way it is. There are a ton of areas of San Diego that will not decrease in value any further and I believe that some of you can’t wrap your heads around this idea. I do not expect these areas to increase in value any time soon either. Lets face it, San Diego is not Las Vegas or Tampa or Orlando or Phoenix etc… We live in a City that is desirable and people are buying homes at the cyclic rate in our city. If the home is priced at market value, it will sell quickly. I also don’t believe that San Diego has a whole lot of ghost ivnentory left out there compared to the rest of the state/country. I do think that other parts of the country are not as fortunate. Just my opinion.[/quote]

I echo your sentiments, lifeisgood, and do not even consider myself “bullish.”

Whichever turns a particular RE market takes affects only that micro-market. Even in SD County, there are many micro-markets. I’ve said before that multiple foreclosures and short sales in 91915 (Chula Vista) for instance, has NOTHING to do with what’s going on over in (nearby) Coronado. The sellers and buyers in these two markets are vastly different from one another as is the desirability factors of the particular homes/areas within them.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=lifeisgood]I love this website for the different points of view on the housing market. I think it is hilarious that whenever there is a topic describing housing tumoil, it is always broad and hardly ever specific to San Diego. I really don’t care what is going on in Nevada or any other state for that matter. Any time there is an article written about the San Diego housing market stabilizing, a lot of people on this board tear it up and say that there is an endless amount of data against this idea. I’m not saying that we will see extreme increases in SD home values, but I am suggesting that there are a lot of areas of San Diego that have slightly increased in value or are stable. That is just the way it is. There are a ton of areas of San Diego that will not decrease in value any further and I believe that some of you can’t wrap your heads around this idea. I do not expect these areas to increase in value any time soon either. Lets face it, San Diego is not Las Vegas or Tampa or Orlando or Phoenix etc… We live in a City that is desirable and people are buying homes at the cyclic rate in our city. If the home is priced at market value, it will sell quickly. I also don’t believe that San Diego has a whole lot of ghost ivnentory left out there compared to the rest of the state/country. I do think that other parts of the country are not as fortunate. Just my opinion.[/quote]

I echo your sentiments, lifeisgood, and do not even consider myself “bullish.”

Whichever turns a particular RE market takes affects only that micro-market. Even in SD County, there are many micro-markets. I’ve said before that multiple foreclosures and short sales in 91915 (Chula Vista) for instance, has NOTHING to do with what’s going on over in (nearby) Coronado. The sellers and buyers in these two markets are vastly different from one another as is the desirability factors of the particular homes/areas within them.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=lifeisgood]I love this website for the different points of view on the housing market. I think it is hilarious that whenever there is a topic describing housing tumoil, it is always broad and hardly ever specific to San Diego. I really don’t care what is going on in Nevada or any other state for that matter. Any time there is an article written about the San Diego housing market stabilizing, a lot of people on this board tear it up and say that there is an endless amount of data against this idea. I’m not saying that we will see extreme increases in SD home values, but I am suggesting that there are a lot of areas of San Diego that have slightly increased in value or are stable. That is just the way it is. There are a ton of areas of San Diego that will not decrease in value any further and I believe that some of you can’t wrap your heads around this idea. I do not expect these areas to increase in value any time soon either. Lets face it, San Diego is not Las Vegas or Tampa or Orlando or Phoenix etc… We live in a City that is desirable and people are buying homes at the cyclic rate in our city. If the home is priced at market value, it will sell quickly. I also don’t believe that San Diego has a whole lot of ghost ivnentory left out there compared to the rest of the state/country. I do think that other parts of the country are not as fortunate. Just my opinion.[/quote]

I echo your sentiments, lifeisgood, and do not even consider myself “bullish.”

Whichever turns a particular RE market takes affects only that micro-market. Even in SD County, there are many micro-markets. I’ve said before that multiple foreclosures and short sales in 91915 (Chula Vista) for instance, has NOTHING to do with what’s going on over in (nearby) Coronado. The sellers and buyers in these two markets are vastly different from one another as is the desirability factors of the particular homes/areas within them.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=lifeisgood]I love this website for the different points of view on the housing market. I think it is hilarious that whenever there is a topic describing housing tumoil, it is always broad and hardly ever specific to San Diego. I really don’t care what is going on in Nevada or any other state for that matter. Any time there is an article written about the San Diego housing market stabilizing, a lot of people on this board tear it up and say that there is an endless amount of data against this idea. I’m not saying that we will see extreme increases in SD home values, but I am suggesting that there are a lot of areas of San Diego that have slightly increased in value or are stable. That is just the way it is. There are a ton of areas of San Diego that will not decrease in value any further and I believe that some of you can’t wrap your heads around this idea. I do not expect these areas to increase in value any time soon either. Lets face it, San Diego is not Las Vegas or Tampa or Orlando or Phoenix etc… We live in a City that is desirable and people are buying homes at the cyclic rate in our city. If the home is priced at market value, it will sell quickly. I also don’t believe that San Diego has a whole lot of ghost ivnentory left out there compared to the rest of the state/country. I do think that other parts of the country are not as fortunate. Just my opinion.[/quote]

I echo your sentiments, lifeisgood, and do not even consider myself “bullish.”

Whichever turns a particular RE market takes affects only that micro-market. Even in SD County, there are many micro-markets. I’ve said before that multiple foreclosures and short sales in 91915 (Chula Vista) for instance, has NOTHING to do with what’s going on over in (nearby) Coronado. The sellers and buyers in these two markets are vastly different from one another as is the desirability factors of the particular homes/areas within them.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=lifeisgood]I love this website for the different points of view on the housing market. I think it is hilarious that whenever there is a topic describing housing tumoil, it is always broad and hardly ever specific to San Diego. I really don’t care what is going on in Nevada or any other state for that matter. Any time there is an article written about the San Diego housing market stabilizing, a lot of people on this board tear it up and say that there is an endless amount of data against this idea. I’m not saying that we will see extreme increases in SD home values, but I am suggesting that there are a lot of areas of San Diego that have slightly increased in value or are stable. That is just the way it is. There are a ton of areas of San Diego that will not decrease in value any further and I believe that some of you can’t wrap your heads around this idea. I do not expect these areas to increase in value any time soon either. Lets face it, San Diego is not Las Vegas or Tampa or Orlando or Phoenix etc… We live in a City that is desirable and people are buying homes at the cyclic rate in our city. If the home is priced at market value, it will sell quickly. I also don’t believe that San Diego has a whole lot of ghost ivnentory left out there compared to the rest of the state/country. I do think that other parts of the country are not as fortunate. Just my opinion.[/quote]

I echo your sentiments, lifeisgood, and do not even consider myself “bullish.”

Whichever turns a particular RE market takes affects only that micro-market. Even in SD County, there are many micro-markets. I’ve said before that multiple foreclosures and short sales in 91915 (Chula Vista) for instance, has NOTHING to do with what’s going on over in (nearby) Coronado. The sellers and buyers in these two markets are vastly different from one another as is the desirability factors of the particular homes/areas within them.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=walterwhite]the whining law school kids with the 200,000 debt actually have a valid whine. You’re not really putting yourself in their shoes. if the 200,000 would just stay a stable number, i’d agree, no whining. but they’ve been given a LIFTEIME of debt, that will grow like a cancer, with interest penalties and fees if they’re not making money, really good money, that they can never get rid of forever and ever. if you don’t find a way to start servicing it soon, you will be screwed on the balance sheet of life for the rest of your life. which again, i would agree, no whining, if it were just a matter of getting out there and hustling, which will work for some, but not all of the suckers who were processed through the educational loan system….

and sure, you say, dont go get the degree. you know what you signe dup for.

but as the lawsuits start unfurling, it’ll be argued that the schools misrepresented the employment statistics and numbers….

and maybe that problem applies to others without law school degrees. i don’t know. but there are limits to growth for a society, and wouldnt that play out to individual limits for people, where the rubber hits the road?[/quote]

scaredy, I really think this lack of REAL jobs in CA for recent bar-card recipients is due to the “WWII set” NOT retiring. Many licensed in the late fifties/early sixties are still practicing. I recently heard a “good” and later “winning” argument at the 4th DCA here in SD from an 81 yr old. If they are not sole practitioners, many STILL have their “finger in the pot” as “partners” on paper, acting “of counsel” and otherwise consulting and mentoring in med-size to large firms, while continuing with their local philanthropy endeavors and charity golf tournaments :=] Most have caseloads, if even one complex case or class-action suit they are still “handling.” These old-timers keep people like me busy, as they don’t know what to do with a computer except hang their coats over it, lol! Doesn’t matter … they can still talk it and walk it, with their hands tied behind their backs and that’s all that counts :=]

As far as ex-law students with $200K loans who can’t seem to pass the bar … there are a few of these, too, which is unfortunate. Believe it or not, there are STILL (public AND private) law schools around where a JD can be earned for =<$120K. $200K of student loan debt is excessive in this economy, IMHO ... "prestigious name" be damned. I DO think many recent college grads enroll in law school with unrealistic expectations as to the amount of jobs available everywhere. Many new JDs (awaiting bar results) and recent bar-card recipients work as paralegals or "certified legal interns" out of necessity ... often for years. A one-year paralegal certificate from a private school only costs $4500 to $6500 (that's "hundreds"). A two-year community college certificate/Assoc degree in "paralegal studies" costs even less. A HS diploma is all that's required to enroll in the CC course.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=walterwhite]the whining law school kids with the 200,000 debt actually have a valid whine. You’re not really putting yourself in their shoes. if the 200,000 would just stay a stable number, i’d agree, no whining. but they’ve been given a LIFTEIME of debt, that will grow like a cancer, with interest penalties and fees if they’re not making money, really good money, that they can never get rid of forever and ever. if you don’t find a way to start servicing it soon, you will be screwed on the balance sheet of life for the rest of your life. which again, i would agree, no whining, if it were just a matter of getting out there and hustling, which will work for some, but not all of the suckers who were processed through the educational loan system….

and sure, you say, dont go get the degree. you know what you signe dup for.

but as the lawsuits start unfurling, it’ll be argued that the schools misrepresented the employment statistics and numbers….

and maybe that problem applies to others without law school degrees. i don’t know. but there are limits to growth for a society, and wouldnt that play out to individual limits for people, where the rubber hits the road?[/quote]

scaredy, I really think this lack of REAL jobs in CA for recent bar-card recipients is due to the “WWII set” NOT retiring. Many licensed in the late fifties/early sixties are still practicing. I recently heard a “good” and later “winning” argument at the 4th DCA here in SD from an 81 yr old. If they are not sole practitioners, many STILL have their “finger in the pot” as “partners” on paper, acting “of counsel” and otherwise consulting and mentoring in med-size to large firms, while continuing with their local philanthropy endeavors and charity golf tournaments :=] Most have caseloads, if even one complex case or class-action suit they are still “handling.” These old-timers keep people like me busy, as they don’t know what to do with a computer except hang their coats over it, lol! Doesn’t matter … they can still talk it and walk it, with their hands tied behind their backs and that’s all that counts :=]

As far as ex-law students with $200K loans who can’t seem to pass the bar … there are a few of these, too, which is unfortunate. Believe it or not, there are STILL (public AND private) law schools around where a JD can be earned for =<$120K. $200K of student loan debt is excessive in this economy, IMHO ... "prestigious name" be damned. I DO think many recent college grads enroll in law school with unrealistic expectations as to the amount of jobs available everywhere. Many new JDs (awaiting bar results) and recent bar-card recipients work as paralegals or "certified legal interns" out of necessity ... often for years. A one-year paralegal certificate from a private school only costs $4500 to $6500 (that's "hundreds"). A two-year community college certificate/Assoc degree in "paralegal studies" costs even less. A HS diploma is all that's required to enroll in the CC course.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=walterwhite]the whining law school kids with the 200,000 debt actually have a valid whine. You’re not really putting yourself in their shoes. if the 200,000 would just stay a stable number, i’d agree, no whining. but they’ve been given a LIFTEIME of debt, that will grow like a cancer, with interest penalties and fees if they’re not making money, really good money, that they can never get rid of forever and ever. if you don’t find a way to start servicing it soon, you will be screwed on the balance sheet of life for the rest of your life. which again, i would agree, no whining, if it were just a matter of getting out there and hustling, which will work for some, but not all of the suckers who were processed through the educational loan system….

and sure, you say, dont go get the degree. you know what you signe dup for.

but as the lawsuits start unfurling, it’ll be argued that the schools misrepresented the employment statistics and numbers….

and maybe that problem applies to others without law school degrees. i don’t know. but there are limits to growth for a society, and wouldnt that play out to individual limits for people, where the rubber hits the road?[/quote]

scaredy, I really think this lack of REAL jobs in CA for recent bar-card recipients is due to the “WWII set” NOT retiring. Many licensed in the late fifties/early sixties are still practicing. I recently heard a “good” and later “winning” argument at the 4th DCA here in SD from an 81 yr old. If they are not sole practitioners, many STILL have their “finger in the pot” as “partners” on paper, acting “of counsel” and otherwise consulting and mentoring in med-size to large firms, while continuing with their local philanthropy endeavors and charity golf tournaments :=] Most have caseloads, if even one complex case or class-action suit they are still “handling.” These old-timers keep people like me busy, as they don’t know what to do with a computer except hang their coats over it, lol! Doesn’t matter … they can still talk it and walk it, with their hands tied behind their backs and that’s all that counts :=]

As far as ex-law students with $200K loans who can’t seem to pass the bar … there are a few of these, too, which is unfortunate. Believe it or not, there are STILL (public AND private) law schools around where a JD can be earned for =<$120K. $200K of student loan debt is excessive in this economy, IMHO ... "prestigious name" be damned. I DO think many recent college grads enroll in law school with unrealistic expectations as to the amount of jobs available everywhere. Many new JDs (awaiting bar results) and recent bar-card recipients work as paralegals or "certified legal interns" out of necessity ... often for years. A one-year paralegal certificate from a private school only costs $4500 to $6500 (that's "hundreds"). A two-year community college certificate/Assoc degree in "paralegal studies" costs even less. A HS diploma is all that's required to enroll in the CC course.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=walterwhite]the whining law school kids with the 200,000 debt actually have a valid whine. You’re not really putting yourself in their shoes. if the 200,000 would just stay a stable number, i’d agree, no whining. but they’ve been given a LIFTEIME of debt, that will grow like a cancer, with interest penalties and fees if they’re not making money, really good money, that they can never get rid of forever and ever. if you don’t find a way to start servicing it soon, you will be screwed on the balance sheet of life for the rest of your life. which again, i would agree, no whining, if it were just a matter of getting out there and hustling, which will work for some, but not all of the suckers who were processed through the educational loan system….

and sure, you say, dont go get the degree. you know what you signe dup for.

but as the lawsuits start unfurling, it’ll be argued that the schools misrepresented the employment statistics and numbers….

and maybe that problem applies to others without law school degrees. i don’t know. but there are limits to growth for a society, and wouldnt that play out to individual limits for people, where the rubber hits the road?[/quote]

scaredy, I really think this lack of REAL jobs in CA for recent bar-card recipients is due to the “WWII set” NOT retiring. Many licensed in the late fifties/early sixties are still practicing. I recently heard a “good” and later “winning” argument at the 4th DCA here in SD from an 81 yr old. If they are not sole practitioners, many STILL have their “finger in the pot” as “partners” on paper, acting “of counsel” and otherwise consulting and mentoring in med-size to large firms, while continuing with their local philanthropy endeavors and charity golf tournaments :=] Most have caseloads, if even one complex case or class-action suit they are still “handling.” These old-timers keep people like me busy, as they don’t know what to do with a computer except hang their coats over it, lol! Doesn’t matter … they can still talk it and walk it, with their hands tied behind their backs and that’s all that counts :=]

As far as ex-law students with $200K loans who can’t seem to pass the bar … there are a few of these, too, which is unfortunate. Believe it or not, there are STILL (public AND private) law schools around where a JD can be earned for =<$120K. $200K of student loan debt is excessive in this economy, IMHO ... "prestigious name" be damned. I DO think many recent college grads enroll in law school with unrealistic expectations as to the amount of jobs available everywhere. Many new JDs (awaiting bar results) and recent bar-card recipients work as paralegals or "certified legal interns" out of necessity ... often for years. A one-year paralegal certificate from a private school only costs $4500 to $6500 (that's "hundreds"). A two-year community college certificate/Assoc degree in "paralegal studies" costs even less. A HS diploma is all that's required to enroll in the CC course.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=walterwhite]the whining law school kids with the 200,000 debt actually have a valid whine. You’re not really putting yourself in their shoes. if the 200,000 would just stay a stable number, i’d agree, no whining. but they’ve been given a LIFTEIME of debt, that will grow like a cancer, with interest penalties and fees if they’re not making money, really good money, that they can never get rid of forever and ever. if you don’t find a way to start servicing it soon, you will be screwed on the balance sheet of life for the rest of your life. which again, i would agree, no whining, if it were just a matter of getting out there and hustling, which will work for some, but not all of the suckers who were processed through the educational loan system….

and sure, you say, dont go get the degree. you know what you signe dup for.

but as the lawsuits start unfurling, it’ll be argued that the schools misrepresented the employment statistics and numbers….

and maybe that problem applies to others without law school degrees. i don’t know. but there are limits to growth for a society, and wouldnt that play out to individual limits for people, where the rubber hits the road?[/quote]

scaredy, I really think this lack of REAL jobs in CA for recent bar-card recipients is due to the “WWII set” NOT retiring. Many licensed in the late fifties/early sixties are still practicing. I recently heard a “good” and later “winning” argument at the 4th DCA here in SD from an 81 yr old. If they are not sole practitioners, many STILL have their “finger in the pot” as “partners” on paper, acting “of counsel” and otherwise consulting and mentoring in med-size to large firms, while continuing with their local philanthropy endeavors and charity golf tournaments :=] Most have caseloads, if even one complex case or class-action suit they are still “handling.” These old-timers keep people like me busy, as they don’t know what to do with a computer except hang their coats over it, lol! Doesn’t matter … they can still talk it and walk it, with their hands tied behind their backs and that’s all that counts :=]

As far as ex-law students with $200K loans who can’t seem to pass the bar … there are a few of these, too, which is unfortunate. Believe it or not, there are STILL (public AND private) law schools around where a JD can be earned for =<$120K. $200K of student loan debt is excessive in this economy, IMHO ... "prestigious name" be damned. I DO think many recent college grads enroll in law school with unrealistic expectations as to the amount of jobs available everywhere. Many new JDs (awaiting bar results) and recent bar-card recipients work as paralegals or "certified legal interns" out of necessity ... often for years. A one-year paralegal certificate from a private school only costs $4500 to $6500 (that's "hundreds"). A two-year community college certificate/Assoc degree in "paralegal studies" costs even less. A HS diploma is all that's required to enroll in the CC course.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]There is something seriously wrong with much of the “Baby Boomer” generation. They for the most part are the parents of these Millennials.

For some reason their kids, born mostly in the 1980’s, are “special”. Remember the “Baby on Board” signs in car windows?

They won’t kick their ADULT kids out because those kids are their best friends. My parents were not my friends when I was a young man. They were parents, IMHO as it should be.[/quote]

JohnAlt91941, baby boomers had their kids from the mid 60’s all the way thru the 90’s. Not ALL boomers “coddled” their kids and decided to be their “best friend.” I was raised like you and believe my kids already have enough “friends.” I believe parents should be parents.

[bearishgurl]

[quote=JohnAlt91941]There is something seriously wrong with much of the “Baby Boomer” generation. They for the most part are the parents of these Millennials.

For some reason their kids, born mostly in the 1980’s, are “special”. Remember the “Baby on Board” signs in car windows?

They won’t kick their ADULT kids out because those kids are their best friends. My parents were not my friends when I was a young man. They were parents, IMHO as it should be.[/quote]

JohnAlt91941, baby boomers had their kids from the mid 60’s all the way thru the 90’s. Not ALL boomers “coddled” their kids and decided to be their “best friend.” I was raised like you and believe my kids already have enough “friends.” I believe parents should be parents.

[Author]

Posts