|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On December 11 2012 14:33 sam!zdat wrote:
by actual education you mean in class, right? 12 hours of seminar a week seems like a full load to me (would be at my alma mater). 7 is too little.
if you know me at all, you know that I enthusiastically agree that education is far too easy
edit: it's because we've gotten this idea that education is for training a workforce that's it's degenerated. that's not what education is for
It is seminars + any other time set by the university. Alma mater is college meaning second and third year are first two years of university here, but the numbers are from 3rd and 5th year, meaning first and third year of US university. 12 hours is low given the way danish universities are structured. It is actually different from university to university, but basically it is measured in ECTS and you have to have had a certain number each semester according to the study guide. 1 ECTS is about 30 hours in total time. A semester will usually be 30 ECTS. 20 weeks is a total of 45 hours of studying time per week. I believe my study used about 1 to 2 in onsite education to self-study. In this case you should have about 15 hours of pure seminars each week for a full semester. Another place in the report the numbers are 5 to 8 hours of pure seminar time for humaniora so it is far below what should be expected.
|
On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive.
Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich.
I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into.
|
@radiatoren: ah, I had a slightly higher ratio of self-study to class time at my college. I misjudged how much work that would be.
|
On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into.
Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born.
|
On December 11 2012 14:42 sam!zdat wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:
I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Also the most disgustingly litigious culture ever to grace human civilization... 
I think a large part of it isn't any sort of inherent litigiousness as opposed to the fact that, if you are harmed and can't pay for your medical bills, or even worse, can no longer be productive, somebody has to help you out unless you fancy dying in a gutter. In most developed countries, the state would help, and even in a lot of developing countries, one's clan or village might help. but in America one's only real option is to sue, sue, sue. If people didn't have to worry about being discarded as a worthless subhuman if they lost the ability to do their jobs, there probably wouldn't be as many be lawsuits.
|
On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born.
It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%.
The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn.
Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
|
On December 11 2012 16:47 HunterX11 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 14:42 sam!zdat wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:
I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Also the most disgustingly litigious culture ever to grace human civilization... I think a large part of it isn't any sort of inherent litigiousness as opposed to the fact that, if you are harmed and can't pay for your medical bills, or even worse, can no longer be productive, somebody has to help you out unless you fancy dying in a gutter. In most developed countries, the state would help, and even in a lot of developing countries, one's clan or village might help. but in America one's only real option is to sue, sue, sue. If people didn't have to worry about being discarded as a worthless subhuman if they lost the ability to do their jobs, there probably wouldn't be as many be lawsuits.
That's an interesting point and it certainly puts the litigious culture of the United States into perspective. Of course, many people profit from the system as well, the judicial system favoring a contest between legal parties in civil cases rather than actual arbitration. I imagine some people see it as gambling; you strike the right lawsuit and you might just hit the jackpot.
|
when I was young I thought lawyers were worthless even though I always wanted to become one (ha). Now as I grow older I see the necessity and the complex societal web that makes it necessary.
Compounded with the fact corporations, cops, cities and other lawyers will abuse you unless there's some sort of $$$ penalty. No one cares until $$$ gets involved. Even worse is figuring out how to untangle the insanely complex web of intellectual property/patent litigation.... I dare you to read orders and opinions from Lucy Koh in the federal district of California, it makes other litigation in other areas look like children's play and there seems to me no clear way deterring litigation in today's digital age. Judge Posner has some decent ideas though.
|
On December 11 2012 17:00 forgottendreams wrote:
No one cares until $$$ gets involved.
We should note in passing that this is not culturally-historically universal.
|
On December 11 2012 16:51 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born. It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%. The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn. Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
Not to mention city taxes....
Does Canada have their employers match their RRSP?
Surprised you'd have less of a safety net here though, if you get a job in California and enough to be in the 28% federal tax bracket, your health insurance is assuredly covered, your 401k is being matched by an employer, and you're getting plenty of other benefits that escape me at the moment.
You also do not pay tax after the first penny earned. For example, if you made $10,000, you'd most likely pay zero income tax. In fact, you'd most likely get a refund for qualifying for something.
|
On December 11 2012 16:59 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:47 HunterX11 wrote:On December 11 2012 14:42 sam!zdat wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:
I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Also the most disgustingly litigious culture ever to grace human civilization... I think a large part of it isn't any sort of inherent litigiousness as opposed to the fact that, if you are harmed and can't pay for your medical bills, or even worse, can no longer be productive, somebody has to help you out unless you fancy dying in a gutter. In most developed countries, the state would help, and even in a lot of developing countries, one's clan or village might help. but in America one's only real option is to sue, sue, sue. If people didn't have to worry about being discarded as a worthless subhuman if they lost the ability to do their jobs, there probably wouldn't be as many be lawsuits. That's an interesting point and it certainly puts the litigious culture of the United States into perspective. Of course, many people profit from the system as well, the judicial system favoring a contest between legal parties in civil cases rather than actual arbitration. I imagine some people see it as gambling; you strike the right lawsuit and you might just hit the jackpot.
This is wrong. The US judicial system does not favor litigation over arbitration because litigation puts burdens on the courts whereas arbitration is done by someone else. Its also much rarer to get subsidized legal assistance for arbitration. And arbitration decisions can be kept private whereas court transcripts are theoretically available to the public. For all these reasons corporations also favor binding arbitration over courts and juries.
|
On December 11 2012 16:51 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born. It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%. The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn. Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
What kind of job offer would pay for an immigration lawyer for you but then pay you less than a Canadian equivalent?
I know that when I worked as a corporate lawyer I made something like 50-70k more than my friends who stayed in Canada and we ended up paying more or less the same rates and working the same awful hours.
|
On December 11 2012 16:51 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born. It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%. The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn.Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
Not really, after deductions and all.
|
On December 11 2012 16:51 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born. It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%. The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn. Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
We have Government and Provincial Sales Taxes though. So Canadians pay 5-15% (depending on province) consumption tax on many products, regardless of the income we make.
|
On December 11 2012 16:51 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2012 16:02 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 15:35 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 14:41 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 14:26 Sub40APM wrote:On December 11 2012 13:52 radiatoren wrote:On December 11 2012 05:06 BluePanther wrote:On December 11 2012 04:10 Rassy wrote:
I have to go with the first answer.
Am not sure how it is in the usa but in the netherlands the law study is the easiest study by far at university level.
That does not mean there are no smart lawyers,its just that a law study alone is not sufficient to qualify someone as a philosopher king.
My expectations for the cliff are no solution and no fall off the cliff.
They will find an intermediate solution, postponing most of the automatic budget cuts and they will come with a solution when they are about to hit the debt ceiling (wich i believe is expected to be in february/march?) In the US, Lawyer is a (professional) doctoral degree. It's three years, post-undergrad. It's also probably one of the hardest graduate schools to get into at more prestigious schools. The only program I'd compare it to in difficulty is medical school. It's not really the same as it is in Europe. Most lawyers also have a degree in something else as well. "Law" really isn't any sort of undergraduate degree in the USA. When it comes to the job, danish lawyers lack some of the incentives US lawyers have. The damages in civil cases are a lot smaller than in USA and that is making a "win to get payed" model completely unsustainable. Therefore people choose it for the career instead of the money. Most American lawyers are not wealthy, if i recall correctly the ABA published data that shows an average lawyer makes sllightly below the median national income. The reason why so many people think lawyers are rich is because they focus on the top, either those who work in big law firms and for whom starting salaries are 160,000 a year in the first year or the people who are really good at suing [these are the ones I suppose your post refers to], those guys can become millionaires with the right client. But to the guy you are responding to, I think you are way off base. To get into an elite American law school you have to do well on one standardized test. Yes, its true that the law schools choose to accept the top 3-4% of the test takers, but the actual test is not that hard. And if you have an inclination towards logic then its downright easy. There is no math on it, just a reading sections and two logic sections and thats it. The actual education in law school is again hard in a subjective kind of way, all students are rated on a curve so that if all your classmates are smarter than you than you will be worse off but in general its relatively easy to end up being a median student. But the only grades that matter are the ones for your first year, where you learn 6 pre-set subjects with everyone else. You learn almost nothing that is applicable to the practice of law. A danish average lawyer makes 110,000 to 120,000 each year before the 50% taxation and with 10 years experience. But I was not trying to say that US lawyers make a lot of money. I was implying that damages in USA makes civil courts more attractive. Ah. Well, I would still reply that contrary to popular perception the rewards in the profession as a whole are not that great. But its true that the culture is much more litigious and if you get the right kind of freak case you get rich. I would assume that the Danes also dont have the crippling student debt that too many Americans get suckered into. Nope. Study debts are seldom more than $ 3,000. If you live a bit sparse you can live fine from the public grants of about $ 850 each month since special housing is provided at a cheap rent. Universal healthcare and free education is really amazing to have.Paying from about 28% to a maximum of 59% in taxes is not as much fun. It is a trade-off. I prefer having the healthcare and education rather than paying less in taxes, but in the end we cannot choose where we are born. It's only 28% federal tax. If you live in say, California, you'll be paying up to 37%. The brackets matter, too. In Canada (Can't speak for Denmark), you don't pay a penny of tax on the first $12,000-15,000/year. In the US, in some insane desire for "equality", you'll be paying at least 10%, starting from the very first dollar you earn. Had I taken a job I was offered in California, I'd have ended up paying more taxes then I would have in Canada... And have gotten a smaller social safety net for it.
28% is total government + state effective taxation without owning house or car. The lower bracket is fixed so the government tax is 40-"state tax". The 40 % is on last earned dollar, making actual tax significantly lower. We have a bit lower tax exemption of about $ 7,000. The rest of the exemption system seems to be more or less the same as US, meaning that it takes a tax lawyer to actually get the exemption you can get to.
28 % is on a minimum wage job with about $ 21,000 per year.
The upper bracket is 67% taxation getting hit when you have an income of about 84,000 per year, but there is a full taxation stop if you reach something like 60 % in effective taxation. A 100,000 dollar income would have an effectibe taxation of about 42 % and a 200,000 dollar income has 54 %. I am not counting property taxes (there are 2, depending on value of house and the lot) nor the extra taxes on especially cars ($ 20,000 is an extremely cheap car here. fuel is about $ 2.20 per liter, there are wiegt taxes on cars and some time-dependent inspections they have to pass etc.).
Most of the rest of the taxation differences between USA and Denmark mostly fall upon companies. Effectively companies pay a lot in special taxes (green taxes especially), but ithey also get a lot of both EU- and government-support.
|
Snyder just guaranteed a Democratic tidal wave in 2014.
|
On December 12 2012 10:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Snyder just guaranteed a Democratic tidal wave in 2014.
I wouldn't expect anything less.
|
On December 12 2012 10:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Snyder just guaranteed a Democratic tidal wave in 2014.
My dad is a fairly high-ranking government employee in the state of Michigan (Detroit) and has met with Snyder a few times; as you might guess, this coming from me of all people, he does not have a high opinion of the man and of Michigan Republicans in general. Higher Ed is more or less the states greatest resource, and why the state legislature thought this was the time to pass a controversial right to work law I'll never understand. You are exactly right, Michigan Republicans effectively just started their 2014 campaign, and not on the right foot.
|
On December 12 2012 11:01 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 10:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Snyder just guaranteed a Democratic tidal wave in 2014. My dad is a fairly high-ranking government employee in the state of Michigan (Detroit) and has met with Snyder a few times; as you might guess, this coming from me of all people, he does not have a high opinion of the man and of Michigan Republicans in general. Higher Ed is more or less the states greatest resource, and why the state legislature thought this was the time to pass a controversial right to work law I'll never understand. You are exactly right, Michigan Republicans effectively just started their 2014 campaign, and not on the right foot.
I remember when the Democrats said that about public right to work in Wisconsin. That was fun.
|
On December 12 2012 12:34 BluePanther wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2012 11:01 farvacola wrote:On December 12 2012 10:53 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Snyder just guaranteed a Democratic tidal wave in 2014. My dad is a fairly high-ranking government employee in the state of Michigan (Detroit) and has met with Snyder a few times; as you might guess, this coming from me of all people, he does not have a high opinion of the man and of Michigan Republicans in general. Higher Ed is more or less the states greatest resource, and why the state legislature thought this was the time to pass a controversial right to work law I'll never understand. You are exactly right, Michigan Republicans effectively just started their 2014 campaign, and not on the right foot. I remember when the Democrats said that about public right to work in Wisconsin. That was fun.
Wisconsin and Michigan are not similar enough to warrant that sort of comparison in my opinion; Michigan's union culture is far more engrained, the economy there is far worse, and higher ed is practically the states greatest resource. Wisconsin (and Minnesota for that matter) has a far more divergent political history insofar as grassroots issue support is concerned.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
