[Quintus Curtius]

Here's the latest installment in the ongoing drama about why school tuitions keep going up and up.

A "law professor" who specializes in lecturing on "poverty" actually makes $212,000 per year.

By teaching one class per semester on "poverty".

And anyone who's been to law school knows that these so-called "professors" are hardly worthy of the name. Most of them have never practiced law in the real world with real clients, have never actually tried a case in court, never had to earn their bread by earning fees from clients.

In short, they are worthless, do-nothings, fucksticks living fat on the government dole.

So here we have a guy who lectures people on poverty while raking in huge piles of money for basically doing nothing. Yes, welcome to America, land of the corrupt hypocrites.

One of my common themes has been that our generation has consistently and relentlessly been sold out by the older generation. Our fathers' generation has betrayed us deeply and profoundly on many different levels: financially, morally, and spiritually.

Here's the link:

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/18167/

And this is what he looks like:

[Samseau]

A bloated, fat piece of shit. Of course a law professor gig is one of the easier jobs to hold, but extremely difficult to land. You need to kiss some serious ass to make it into a good school, or just have family connections. And once you're in, getting thrown out is next to impossible. What they teach in law classes (I was there) is extremely easy material to teach. Knowing esoteric law does not take any brainpower, just a geek vibe to memorize old cases.

[Quintus Curtius]

(06-27-2014 04:16 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

A bloated, fat piece of shit. Of course a law professor gig is one of the easier jobs to hold, but extremely difficult to land. You need to kiss some serious ass to make it into a good school, or just have family connections. And once you're in, getting thrown out is next to impossible. What they teach in law classes (I was there) is extremely easy material to teach. Knowing esoteric law does not take any brainpower, just a geek vibe to memorize old cases.

Well and truly said Samulus.

What really burns my ass about this is that I think back to law school and remember what worthless pieces of shit my so-called "professors" were.

These people were usually dorks who worked a few years as tools and slaves in big firms, where they did nothing but ride a desk and shuffle papers around. Never met with clients, never went to court, never tried a case, never got into the trenches of real combat with litigation.

And then these fucks (mostly betas, gays, and women) get some cushy job at a university, making a lot of money for doing nothing.

I wouldn't even mind it so much if law school actually helped us. But they did nothing for us in terms of helping us find jobs. They take your money for 3 years and then throw you to the wolves.

[turkishcandy]

I fail to see the hypocricy here. Sure he is overpaid for the trivial subject he is lecturing on, but I don't think his salary and his specilization create a hypocricy. Whether we like it or not, he is a law professor and law professors help create the doctrine and educate the young minds of the future men of law. They are hardly parasites. What is he supposed to do, lecture for free just becase the subject is poverty?

The staff should be the last people to blame for the colleges overcharging students and the professors being overpaid. It is the U.S government that should be blamed. Bank loans tilt the market in colleges' favor and the students are given a choice between being a high school graduate in their entire lives and being overcharged for a useless diploma.

Education is too important to be left in the hands of colleges. Government should either have a monopoly or a tight restricting control over the education. In my country and many others in Eastern Europe, government universities are the best, and they are free, so only the top students get to get in. The rich and the dumb get a college diploma and they are being laughed at. If you don't control the education, the students will end up getting loans worth tens of thousands of dollars from banks to pay for their gender studies major. Screw that. Education is the one thing that should be kept anti-capitalist.

[scorpion]

The bloat of academia (and its corresponding drop in quality) is simply yet another consequence of an obscenely bloated federal government. I mean, is it even remotely feasible that $212k of economic value is derived from this man's work? Lecturing college students for three hours per week on poverty is worth that much in a free market? Get real. Compare that to how hard you've got to hustle in the real world to pull down that kind of money.

We live in a rigged system where the name of the game is getting yourself as close to the Federal Reserve's bloated banking system and/or the bloated federal government (but I repeat myself) as you can. That's basically the recipe for getting ahead these days. Even a lot of so-called "private sector" jobs that are lauded today are, on closer inspection, nothing more than feeding at the government teat, due to government contracts and handouts.

This fat piece of shit is enabled by federal student loans and grants that are sending way too many kids to college. These state schools also get yearly funding increases from their state legislatures as well as tuition increases (paid for by federal student loans), which enables them to keep raising the salaries of administrators and well-connected professors like this guy.

[Quintus Curtius]

(06-27-2014 04:59 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

The bloat of academia (and its corresponding drop in quality) is simply yet another consequence of an obscenely bloated federal government. I mean, is it even remotely feasible that $212k of economic value is derived from this man's work? Lecturing college students for three hours per week on poverty is worth that much in a free market? Get real. Compare that to how hard you've got to hustle in the real world to pull down that kind of money.

We live in a rigged system where the name of the game is getting yourself as close to the Federal Reserve's bloated banking system and/or the bloated federal government (but I repeat myself) as you can. That's basically the recipe for getting ahead these days. Even a lot of so-called "private sector" jobs that are lauded today are, on closer inspection, nothing more than feeding at the government teat, due to government contracts and handouts.

This fat piece of shit is enabled by federal student loans and grants that are sending way too many kids to college. These state schools also get yearly funding increases from their state legislatures as well as tuition increases (paid for by federal student loans), which enables them to keep raising the salaries of administrators and well-connected professors like this guy.

[Dr. Howard]

interesting, I thought he'd look more like this

[Quintus Curtius]

(06-27-2014 04:57 PM)turkishcandy Wrote:  

I fail to see the hypocricy here. Sure he is overpaid for the trivial subject he is lecturing on, but I don't think his salary and his specilization create a hypocricy. Whether we like it or not, he is a law professor and law professors help create the doctrine and educate the young minds of the future men of law. They are hardly parasites. What is he supposed to do, lecture for free just becase the subject is poverty?

The hypocrisy here lies in this simple fact:

He is, by demanding unreasonable fees for lecturing on an easy topic, contributing to the very pauperization that is lecturing about. He's part of the problem. It is fucks like him that have bled our generation white.

What have these people done for us? Thrown you a few feel-good bones about "free market" and "capitalism" and how it all works out fairly in the end.

Yeah, right.

That's just the opiates they try to feed us as they steal everything we have.

[Mekorig]

These issue i have discussed a million time with some fellow students. I am thankfull that most of my proffesors are working lawyers, or judges, or work on the judicial branch. They have a dialy and direct connection with the Law, not the sterile over-analisis of the academisists.

[void]

(06-27-2014 04:59 PM)scorpion Wrote:  

The bloat of academia (and its corresponding drop in quality) is simply yet another consequence of an obscenely bloated federal government. I mean, is it even remotely feasible that $212k of economic value is derived from this man's work? Lecturing college students for three hours per week on poverty is worth that much in a free market? Get real. Compare that to how hard you've got to hustle in the real world to pull down that kind of money.

We live in a rigged system where the name of the game is getting yourself as close to the Federal Reserve's bloated banking system and/or the bloated federal government (but I repeat myself) as you can. That's basically the recipe for getting ahead these days. Even a lot of so-called "private sector" jobs that are lauded today are, on closer inspection, nothing more than feeding at the government teat, due to government contracts and handouts.

This fat piece of shit is enabled by federal student loans and grants that are sending way too many kids to college. These state schools also get yearly funding increases from their state legislatures as well as tuition increases (paid for by federal student loans), which enables them to keep raising the salaries of administrators and well-connected professors like this guy.

I am living in the land of milk and honey, where university fees are < 300$/semester and mostly used for administration and financing the cafeterias.
The professors finance their chairs with government money and research projects. They rank in maybe 70-80k$ from the federal government as salary, but earn additional money at the side with projects/speeches.
Conclusion:
1 Not every government bloats up professor salaries.
2 But government internal posts bloat up, including their salaries

[The_CEO]

Don't know about law school prof's - they are probably amongst the most highly paid.

But the big issue in academia now is ADMINISTRATIVE bloat. Administrators making 6 and 7 figures while the trend is moving to "professors" who are really part-time adjuncts, w/o benefits, making less than a Wallmart clerk.

These salaries are public by the way at least at public colleges.

Also, don't forget that some professorships are "endowed": privately or charitably funded.

[Dusty]

There's a lot of money to be made studying poor people:

Quote:

City University is paying liberal economist and columnist Paul Krugman $225,000 to become a professor — but he doesn’t have to teach a course next year.

The rich deal for Krugman — a Nobel laureate who rails against income inequality — was spelled out in documents obtained by Gawker.
Krugman will serve as a “distinguished scholar” in the CUNY Graduate Center’s Luxembourg Income Study Center.
“As a distinguished professor in the Ph.D. program in economics, your nine-month salary will be $225,000. During year one (2015-2016), you will not be expected to teach or supervise students,” said a letter to Krugman, explaining how much he would get and what he would have to do for his paychecks.

“Instead, you will be asked to contribute to our build-up of LIS and the inequality initiative and to play a modest role in our public events.”
In year two and thereafter, Krugman, a New York Times columnist, is expected to teach one seminar per year, the letter said.

[Tuthmosis]

I don't see how this is hypocrisy, or even merits any outrage. There's this strange logic that if you work remotely with anything to do with the common good--or even just a fiscally non-conservative world view--you should live a life of saintly poverty like Jesus. Would there be complaints if he were making the same but were teaching Milton Friedman instead? There's also a point where the contortions required to make something fit into the "big-government-is-the-problem" narrative become excessive.

I could care less about this particular guy, but he's selling what he's got to sell just like everyone else. Even if his work is total bullshit, there's make-work, take-up-space jobs in every profession--jobs that we pay for in consumer costs--so I'm failing to understand why this is any different. Except, his $212K is a pittance compared to even the lowest paid corporate exec, who's wringing the last penny out of your pocket with luggage fees, late charges, and "installation" costs to pay for his extra-decimal-point salary. At least these professors are generally better educated and read than your standard smiling-face CEO, and doing more than shaking hands and scheduling "conference calls" where they delegate everything to everyone else. I've known middle-manager corporate paper-pusher fatties who do even less than "teach one class per semester" (a likely distortion of his full responsibilities and work) and make that kind of money. If I'm not mistaken, professors don't start get this kind of coin until they're quite senior or distinguished in their field.

I know some guys have specific beefs with law school and its purveyors, but we should have some restraint on the general academic axe-grinding--which starts to sound like plain-and-simple anti-intellectualism. It's not like this guy is teaching feminism or gender studies. I understand that universities aren't the mythical "roads to success" that we're fed, but we need to be careful not to start coming off as resentful outrage machines that hate on anything that isn't a STEM degree or some feel-good history-channel style class on WWII-era rifles. I think we should also avoid sounding like hardline Reagan-style anti-government ideologues who crush everything into a "government waste" storyline.

In short: on the scale of shit to be irritated about, this is extremely low on the list--if it's on it at all.

[KorbenDallas]

The rich CEO is a myth. Most CEO's don't make more than 100k. There are a lot of small companies out there.

I agree with Quintus that this guy is a hypocritical fuck, but agree with Tuth that this isn't important.

Lately, I've come to terms with the world.

Your individual actions speak louder than words and consternation ever will.

Enough of us sucking as much out of the system as possible, giving nothing back except to our loved ones, and associating only with those who you want in it, this is the way forward.

[Comte De St. Germain]

Don't blame the man blame the system. The system enabled this and the rampant moral corruption in the West. The beast that is our failed government is the hydra in the room that creates infinite heads for us to charge our swords towards. Don't worry the behemoth will fall on itself when it becomes too bloated and corrupt.

[Quintus Curtius]

(06-27-2014 09:53 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

I don't see how this is hypocrisy, or even merits any outrage. There's this strange logic that if you work remotely with anything to do with the common good--or even just a fiscally non-conservative world view--you should live a life of saintly poverty like Jesus. Would there be complaints if he were making the same but were teaching Milton Friedman instead? There's also a point where the contortions required to make something fit into the "big-government-is-the-problem" narrative become excessive.

I could care less about this particular guy, but he's selling what he's got to sell just like everyone else. Even if his work is total bullshit, there's make-work, take-up-space jobs in every profession--jobs that we pay for in consumer costs--so I'm failing to understand why this is any different. Except, his $212K is a pittance compared to even the lowest paid corporate exec, who's wringing the last penny out of your pocket with luggage fees, late charges, and "installation" costs to pay for his extra-decimal-point salary. At least these professors are generally better educated and read than your standard smiling-face CEO, and doing more than shaking hands and scheduling "conference calls" where they delegate everything to everyone else. I've known middle-manager corporate paper-pusher fatties who do even less than "teach one class per semester" (a likely distortion of his full responsibilities and work) and make that kind of money. If I'm not mistaken, professors don't start get this kind of coin until they're quite senior or distinguished in their field.

I know some guys have specific beefs with law school and its purveyors, but we should have some restraint on the general academic axe-grinding--which starts to sound like plain-and-simple anti-intellectualism. It's not like this guy is teaching feminism or gender studies. I understand that universities aren't the mythical "roads to success" that we're fed, but we need to be careful not to start coming off as resentful outrage machines that hate on anything that isn't a STEM degree or some feel-good history-channel style class on WWII-era rifles. I think we should also avoid sounding like hardline Reagan-style anti-government ideologues who crush everything into a "government waste" storyline.

In short: on the scale of shit to be irritated about, this is extremely low on the list--if it's on it at all.

I see your point, Tuth, but my anger is not based on any philosophical opposition to teaching about this or that subject. It's not also based on any "conservative vs. liberal" dichotomy. For me, this story is more visceral: it's about the older generation sitting on the top of the pile, raking in all the benefits, doing easy, cushy jobs, and not sharing with the younger guys coming up. This guy is sitting on top of the pile, teaching a bullshit subject that anyone can read a book about, and raking in obscene benefits.

From what I see in my day-to-day job, I see the average guy getting totally crushed by the system in this country, which funnels all the wealth to fatcats at the top who do nothing. Or next to nothing. The average guy is seeing his share of the pie get smaller and smaller every year. In this country in 2014, those at the top are taking a disproportionate share of the wealth. The young guys coming up are getting screwed big time, whether they know it or not. Most of them don't realize it yet. I have to fight against big banks, big corporations, and the power of the government every day. And to be perfectly honest, I deeply resent these people.

Most of them are ignoramuses who got their jobs through connections or patronage. They don't want to see us succeed. In this country, unless you are connected, are a woman, or have some other special avenue, it's getting harder and harder to get ahead.

And yeah, I see this guy as embodying that somehow. Maybe I don't know the whole story of his particular situation, but to me it's just injustice for this guy to be raking in big money for doing nothing, while good people I know have to struggle just to get ahead.

This older generation hasn't done anything for us except plunder the system, rape all the benefits out of it, and leave us with an empty sack. A lot of the younger guys here haven't figured this out yet, but they will soon enough, you mark my words. As the pie gets smaller and smaller in the US with every passing year, people are going to start asking: "Who stabbed us in the back? Who sold us out?"

And it was the rich and powerful who did it, the ones who have been running things for the past 30 years. I think both Republicans and Democrats are to blame. They're both run by the same forces: big money.

And this is the type of guy who would crucify me, you, and anyone else on this Forum just for not toeing the party line. And we all know that.

So, yeah, I have a big chip on my shoulder about the older generation, the baby boomers. I have a bad attitude about it. I am seething with resentment and repressed rage. But I own it, it belongs to me, and it's what drives this engine. Which is firing on all cylinders, let me tell you.

They don't want us to get ahead. They don't want us to succeed. They're sitting on top, blocking our paths, trying to keep us down.

[monster]

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

[Samseau]

(06-27-2014 09:53 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

Would there be complaints if he were making the same but were teaching Milton Friedman instead?

Yes.



And just to make this point even more clear - Milton Friedman and other libertarians do not charge very much for their lessons.

A guy making a quarter of a million each year while teaching about poverty is hypocrisy at it's finest. At least corporate fat cats are honest about being in it to win it.

[Comte De St. Germain]

Learning about libertarianism isn't that hard anyways. A lot of Friedman's and various other Liberterian's thoughts have been conveniently catalogued into a website. http://mises.org
Not very hard if you ask me nor costly.