I am in a predicament...

Bill clients at 6-minute increments for thinking about their cases?

(Sorry, Nosborne. Just kidding.)

 

As I understand it, having an LL.B. without becoming an advocate is essentially useless. However, as one law lecturer mentioned, you can become a lecturer without becoming an advocate (i.e., attend KSL and pass the bar). So, one could get their LL.M. and become a lecturer without ever being admitted to practice law in Kenya.

I also just learned that to be admitted as an advocate in Kenya, one must be a citizen of Kenya, Rwanda, Burundi, Uganda, or Tanzania. Essentially, members of the East African Community, excluding South Sudan. I have no interest in acquiring a third citizenship, so that's another reason not to pursue the LL.B.

 

Twenty five years ago they told us that having our JD degrees made us lawyers but passing the Bar made us attorneys. Yeah, right.

 

This thread reminded me of Cornell and Vanderbilt offering Online MLS degrees. $50,000+ for essentially the 1L courses.

I’d be curious what skills the MLS provides to grads? Im not knocking it but still genuinely curious.

 

According to some who've never done one, having a PhD makes you unemployable. I get tired of that one.

 

As another, who has never done one, I look at it this way. Having a PhD does not make you unemployable, but there are many PhD holders whose degrees did not make them employable. We've all read the stories of PhDs on food stamps etc. (I must admit, I've never known one personally.)

My take: It's not the degree's fault. No degree can be designed to make any but one sector of "unemployable" people more employable: those whose barrier is lack of skills or knowledge. People are unemployed or so-called unemployable for many different reasons - most of which have nothing - or almost nothing - to do with degrees.

Degrees improve knowledge and skills. If lack of those two factors is the barrier - the person will be more employable with the degree - doctoral or otherwise. If the barrier to employment is neither lack of skills nor lack of knowledge -- e.g. past record, personality problems, poor job-seeking techniques or poor interview performance, no amount of degree studies is likely to make the holder significantly more employable.

Solutions to these problems involve learning (and sometimes unlearning -or even therapy) but not via degree studies.

 

And if all you want is a job - it's out there, whether you have a PhD or not. When I was 63, I ran out of money. I needed a job - fast.
I got one - in one day, even though I hadn't worked in 13 years (since my retirement at 50). The pay certainly wasn't great but it saved my butt. I worked there a year and a half until I was 65 and the pension money started rolling in. Since then, I've saved more money than I was ever able to save in my working days. I'm not a millionaire, but I don't have to worry about being broke ever again.

I learned a lot of lessons on the way. First: It's OK to be old - and it's OK to be poor. But not both at the same time.

 

I am 30 but my wife and I got married while in college. Some of our fondest memories are from when we made $7.25/hour.

 

That's the problem with anecdotes. They're not generalizable to the population.

Doctorate holders make more than master's degree holders, on average. Master's degree holders make more than bachelor's holders, etc. etc. etc. Individual results vary, of course, which is why even in statistical sampling we take into account variance.

I know you're not saying that; I'm opportunistically using it to make a point.

I sure do agree with this.

 

Fine. Good point - well made.

 

I'm sure, Josh that the memories are fond because of times spent together - not the $7.25 / hour.

 

When my first wife and I were first married, money was really tight. One night we realized we had a 2-for-1 coupon for a Burger King Whopper. We dug through purses and pockets and scraped together the $1.05 it would cost (99 cents, plus tax). As we pulled into the drive-through, we realized we'd left the coupon at home. We were stuck and couldn't turn around, so we went through the line without stopping, slunking off in quiet shame. We shared a can of tomato soup and told that story for years to remind ourselves where we'd been.

 

My late BIL was a musician. He had a masters in music, flute being his main instrument, and this got him a band director's job at a local high school. At the time, he needed to do various gigs to make extra money. And if you played a variety of instruments you would probably be a more in-demand musician. So he learned how to play the clarinet, the saxophone, and piccolo to fill out his "tool box" to make himself more employable to any productions and performers that came through town. As a kid I'd spend Saturdays with him in his music room as he'd go from one instrument to another, hour after hour, starting early in the morning until dinner time. Once he got his foot in the door of production companies, he was a regular in the orchestra pit for Frank Sinatra, Robert Goulet, Sammy Davis Jr., Steve Lawrence and Eydie Gorme, Tom Jones, Disney on Ice, et al. Every time they came through, he'd get the call.

So why did they call him? It wasn't because he had a masters in music. It certainly didn't hurt but it wasn't a deciding factor. It also wasn't because he was highly talented. His key instrument was flute, which he was good enough to be the number one flutist in the local symphony, which might have given them pause, but no this wasn't the reason. And of the other instruments he played there were far more talented musicians than him, that had spent many more years playing them. So why him?

Here's why: He was a multi-instrumentalist that learned his parts exactly the way the conductor wanted them played. He was dependable (big plus for musicians incidentally), was always available (another big plus), and he could perform when necessary. All the practice, all the study, all the learning, culminated in his ability to perform. That's all anyone cared about. From the performer, to the conductor, to the audience. Just show us what you got.

Sadly, he contracted Parkinson's. This eventually took away his ability to play. When he talked about his former playing days, he seemed to miss the early days more than the others. So to him, the journey was indeed the most important thing. And his journey defined his legacy.

 

Sad ending and in a number of senses. Classical music is important and there are studies demonstrating its positive impact. It adds something to life, culture, and the preservation of the arts. Yet, it is a very tough way to make a living (even if you graduate from elite schools). Most graduates get certified as teachers to ensure they have steady income and benefits. Many truly enjoy sharing the passion for music with kids. It is hard to make a living (most symphony orchestras cannot afford to pay wages that would support someone as a full-time job). A musician I know told me most musicians have secondary instruments (he had three or four).

I am not an advocate for the Soviet Union but one of the benefits was that they supported ballet, classical music, and various arts. If you were gifted you could be guaranteed education and a career (as humble as pay may have been). Ordinary people could afford to go to performances. Appreciation of the arts was encouraged (admittedly there could be a heavy political hand).

 

And continuing my last post, our world is impoverished if we don't somehow encourage intellectual development and depth in a number of areas from music to philosophy. Not everyone should or could be a business or criminal justice major or in the medical field. Much as we laugh, we need people who are experts in medieval furniture, art, textiles, and so on. If not part of our history is lost.

 

Hence the screen name "sideman".

I started classical piano lessons seven years ago as an adult. I work at it daily and take three lessons a week with a highly qualified (and almost endlessly patient) teacher. I am nowhere near able to perform in any professional sense. Classical piano is hard and it's hard for everybody.

Well guess what? Jazz is HARDER. I respect people who reach and maintain a "journeyman" level of skill in a single instrument. Multiple instruments is just awesome.

 

I've known PhD holders, professors, who were injured in car accidents or who developed severe chronic illnesses in the prime of their lives. Few were "visibly disabled." Food stamps and other safety net benefits were a godsend for them until they could develop new identities and occupations based on their new abilities.

You're right, their presence on the food stamp list had nothing to do with their degree.