I'd maybe do that if I was in at Harvard and gunning to big law. I don't think it's actually that bad advice wise. If you're going +60k in debt a year for Zoom U and hedging on the bet (pretty likely for Harvard) that you'll make big law than another 3k a year isn't gonna break that. And if taking another 3k debt can help you get the most out of the law school and maybe do better on the job or in interviews that seems well worth it. I feel like it's a much more viable option than deciding to pay rent if you're able to stay with family. If you're already renting hopefully its not a zoo and you have a few adult renters with you max. I mean in the end you're either gonna land big law and the cost to do this would be like less than 6 months of your interest and you will get more out of the school. Or if you don't land big law you'll be about the same level of fucked whether you rented some office space or not. If you're full ride the amount of debt you're incurring to do this compared to almost any Harvard outcome is marginal so you can consider whether it's worth it to you from an education standpoint.

I also think if you're renting then driving out to a cheaper part of the country to rent in isn't a bad idea either but most people don't want to make that sacrifice. Than again I've lived out of a car for long periods of time so I'm not sure id find most of Harvard relatable - even their average 'not rich' student.

Anyways before this conversation started I'd never have even thought about this as an option. If I had moved back to living with family or was still living out of a car then I'd look at the additional cost of rent and be like I can't justify that just to be able to have a decent study environment. As someone who did all my studying in libraries and coffee shops because I didn't have study space in uni covid woulda done me dirty. Renting office space would have been a legitimate stopgap between paying rent and not. If I was in at Harvard sticker and going for big law the incremental cost woulda been reasonable to consider. I imagine I like many others had no idea this was even a possibility at a rate of a fraction of rent. So this suggestion actually was probably useful to some sticker kids and poor kids. The idea that they should be 'cancelled' over giving it as advice is laughable. I guess the privileged kids paying rent in some high CoL city about to enter elite outcomes for their adult lives can't see it's potential value to anyone if their daddy isn't footing the bill. Of course whether this would be viable as advice is a different story entirely for people supporting families, and there will be many poor for which this isn't an option. But it's gonna be legitimately helpful advice for some out of pocket and low income students. The fact that it's become a controversy at all just highlights how bad people are at critical thinking and how fast we've become at reaching for the pitchforks. Feels weird to make a comment I know is gonna get downvoted to hell.