To both Adams: I don't know if I'm the only reader in this position, but I'm having difficulty interpreting what Carlis' response is getting at, particularly with the "My fear . . ." sentence. I don't know if this will help given the seeming ambiguity, but here goes: Since we are at a school where there is a loan repayment assistance program for those who are interested in public interest work, I don't think we should assume that "ShitiBank" will come a knockin' if we want to, as Gold put it, "save the world." I have to hedge my evaluation of this on the fact that I don't know whether LRAP covers undergrad loans, too -- does it? The big issue for us, as I see it, is that once the CLS LRAP program kicks in and covers a percentage of our loan repayment (based on income), we are positioned to apply effort as a way to contribute to others, without much meaningful way to contribute via a combination of applied effort plus money. In addition, the take-home pay, even with the LRAP safety-net, often leaves those in public interest positions distracted by having to find ways to make a dollar stretch. Most everyone in our class should have a pretty good idea by the end of our second summer whether we feel more comfortable helping others with effort only and personal financial distractions, or with an effort/money combo with significantly fewer personal financial distrations (of course, this analysis doesn't factor in extended family financial support, which should be factored in, if it's relevant to you). I think Golds' point is that while the "effort only" avenue is pretty clearly mapped out, the "effort/money" avenue seems only to point in the direction of firm work. (And, in my opinion, firm work is fraught with assumptions and misconceptions about real intent and priorities.) The only other six-figure option I see is by teaching law, and we all know that these days there is a real-world prep period for that, and this option ends up being bestowed on only a select and determined few (I for one don't count myself as nearly "select" enough to even consider this). So, the question in my mind is: Where do we go from here in considering our options? It would be nice to not have to make our professional choices based on this assumed bifurcated scheme. What am I overlooking? Anybody? If I've misconstrued something said above, please correct me so that we know where to take this discussion next.

-- BarbPitman - 01 Feb 2008