Students Of Law Need Econ 101 More Than Deans

It is altogether sensible to posit that individuals pursue education with a view to improving their future income. This rule of thumb holds pretty well for a majority of people but it is not immutable. Many people pursuing education understand that attending college is definitely useful for raising the prospects for one's income. And yet as expected, the demand for education has to reckon with the supply of places by universities whose managers understand that certain courses have greater demand and price them accordingly.

In this pithy article in the Slate Magazine, Reynolds Holding applies fundamental economics reasoning to law schools and concludes that many of the deans have maintained an upwards price adjustment in real tierms despite the evidence that many graduates are often unable to pay for education loans due to a reduction in demand for graduates from law schools. His point is right but I am clear that it is not for the law deans to make an adjustment because they are seeking to maximize revenues and will price at the margin. Instead, this article ought to be read more keenly by the students entering law schools who ought to understand that given the employment situation and expected wages, education in law at prevailing rates may not be a good deal. It is clear that it is the students of law who are "irrationally exuberant". The law deans are merely providing supply due to existing demand. iIt matters less for the moment that the demand is based on an inaccurate assessment of expected incomes.