Subscription pricing
I just read a post that says if you are choosing between going to Loyola and UC Hastings, you just shouldnt go to law school at all, because you won't get a job.
I've worked at two mid-size law firms. One of which worked on celebrity cases and filed suits against major corporation, another works with almost every big hospital in California and many out of state and even out of the country.
At the firmwhich worked for celebrities, the incoming young attorneys started off as unpaid interns. I'm dead serious they were "attorney interns," I posted the job ads. One of the interns went to USC Law. A USC student was desperate enough to take that "job".
At the firm which works for hospitals, one law clerk from a top 50 UC was not hired on as an attorney after passing the bar, and one law clerk was hired on as an attorney coming from a bottom ranked school (like 150). She now has a nice office and she moved into the really bougie super expensive nearby apartment complex.
At both firms, the partners and attorneys who make 100k+ most all went to bottom tier schools.
My point is that, it doesnt seem like going to a good school = you get an amazing job...obviously its the best bet to try to get into a T15, but not everyone has that option.
I've already sent out my apps and I likely will get into a top 60 school, which to me seems pretty good. Not stellar, but good. I wasnt intending on retaking the LSAT and waiting another year because I will go nuts continuing to work f/t at my current job and continuing to live w my parents.
Based on TLS posts, I shouldn't even be applying to law school.
My question isnt specific to my situation, I'm just wondering if its really not worth it to go to law school if you dont get into a top school?
2
58 comments
Total BS. People who say that are the ones who only know how to read their books and get spoon fed everything else. It's not t-14 or bust. ThAts crap. I know people who graduated lower ranked schools and hustled, got a 70k starting job out of school.
Now, get into the best school you can, be REALISTIC, but don't listen to TLS. They're children who like to stand in line to get told where to go. And for people like that, I think that the problem extends beyond just getting a job after law school, but being able to live a functional free life.
@uhinberg359 said:
****> @leahbeuk911 said:
I take what TLS says with a grain of salt. I believe that there are two kind of people that want to be a lawyer.
The kind that is only in it for the money and has not real interest in practicing law and wants to be rich only. They feel it is lottery ticket they have been waiting for.
the kind where law is a passion for them and money is not the center of the universe.
I am in category 2 and very interested in being a lawyer and passionated about it.
But, if my opponent went to tier 1 and acted like a snob towards me because I went the school that was right for me and learn to fight well in court. I say it is not the school. It is the person who has the passion for the law and will fight for their client that will always win through thick and thin.
I posit a third kind of person who cares about money, but doesn't have it at the center of their universe. Such a person might choose to go to law school because they want to practice law. They might then do everything possible to minimize their debt and attend a law school that had as good employment outcomes and as good an LRAP as possible to help pay off the debt they incurred following their dream to be a lawyer.
But, like, everyone cares about money, right? I mean, even the rich kids care about how much debt they owe a school because it's like bragging rights to them.
****> @leahbeuk911 said:
I take what TLS says with a grain of salt. I believe that there are two kind of people that want to be a lawyer.
The kind that is only in it for the money and has not real interest in practicing law and wants to be rich only. They feel it is lottery ticket they have been waiting for.
the kind where law is a passion for them and money is not the center of the universe.
I am in category 2 and very interested in being a lawyer and passionated about it.
But, if my opponent went to tier 1 and acted like a snob towards me because I went the school that was right for me and learn to fight well in court. I say it is not the school. It is the person who has the passion for the law and will fight for their client that will always win through thick and thin.
I posit a third kind of person who cares about money, but doesn't have it at the center of their universe. Such a person might choose to go to law school because they want to practice law. They might then do everything possible to minimize their debt and attend a law school that had as good employment outcomes and as good an LRAP as possible to help pay off the debt they incurred following their dream to be a lawyer.
@leahbeuk911 said:
I take what TLS says with a grain of salt. I believe that there are two kind of people that want to be a lawyer.
The kind that is only in it for the money and has not real interest in practicing law and wants to be rich only. They feel it is lottery ticket they have been waiting for.
the kind where law is a passion for them and money is not the center of the universe.
I am in category 2 and very interested in being a lawyer and passionated about it.
But, if my opponent went to tier 1 and acted like a snob towards me because I went the school that was right for me and learn to fight well in court. I say it is not the school. It is the person who has the passion for the law and will fight for their client that will always win through thick and thin.
Schools have certain cultures, TLS has a certain culture, same with 7sage and every substantial community everywhere. Law and politics are intimately intertwined, and I think that whether they admit it or not most people become interested in the law in part because of politics. This is to say: in law school, don't be surprised when people argue/fight/mess around with you for various unknown reasons. TLS is adversarial like that, too.
I'm not sure exactly how prevalent snobbery is at schools, though I'm sure it exists in abundance!
I take what TLS says with a grain of salt. I believe that there are two kind of people that want to be a lawyer.
The kind that is only in it for the money and has not real interest in practicing law and wants to be rich only. They feel it is lottery ticket they have been waiting for.
the kind where law is a passion for them and money is not the center of the universe.
I am in category 2 and very interested in being a lawyer and passionated about it.
But, if my opponent went to tier 1 and acted like a snob towards me because I went the school that was right for me and learn to fight well in court. I say it is not the school. It is the person who has the passion for the law and will fight for their client that will always win through thick and thin.
@alexwatsontremellen584 said:
@katieshuter1737 said:
Well here's my perspective, which is no doubt coloring my opinions: I'm the ex-wife of a Boalt grad (we were together during his law school years and three stints in different big law firms. I have spent way too much of my life thinking about law, it's safe to say :smile: ). 20 years ago, the full tuition was around $15K/year (which students complained about, haha) and cost of living in the Bay Area was about half of what it is now, and he started with a $265K big law salary at a time where even I walked into his firm and the hiring partner asked if I wanted a job on the spot (they were desperate for scientists in our field at the time). Now I wouldn't be able to cajole them into an informational interview bc there is a glut of applicants with my background. (Fortunately, I'm not looking for a big law job). My ex's in-house salary is now around $150K at a company and he has decades of work experience. He got to work in his choice of locations and pay off his debts bc of the timing of his schooling and job searches. Now tuition is tripled and it's harder to land big law jobs in his field and cost of living has gone up. I'm not convinced my ex would land a job in the Bay Area out of law school at this point especially with an increased debt load to repay (so he'd need a net higher income or lower cost of living). And it used to be you could bow out relatively easily from big law if it turned out it wasn't what you wanted to do, but now it's quite a big investment.
My assumption is that you folks (particularly the HYS crowd) will be very employable. I'm not at all trying to dissuade you from thinking that's the case. The only folks I know that were unemployed from among my T14 friends 20 years ago chose to be unemployed. I just worry about the students that go into any law school nowadays not understanding that $200k-300K really means you've invested in a particular long-term goal (landing a big salary job for which you would be paying $1-$2K/month above your cost of living to repay the debt over 10 years, which seems ok until you add a $3-5K/month mortgage or rent and $2K/month private preschool for each kid in the big cities), so either commit to doing all it will take to repay it (casting a wide net with your job search, hustling/networking, probably not going for PI jobs, maybe living lean for a while or marrying someone else who also works all the time or has a trust fund), or if you want to have the flexibility to do something else, do all you can to maximize scholarship money (better LSATs, or lesser schools counterbalanced with prior work experience/connections). People who chose either one of the scenarios in the latter camp aren't necessarily making a bad decision.
Anyway, this is advice I'd give my own kids. Good luck to all of you...
Yeah. All of my coworkers in other fields in medicine tell me to never underestimate the impact or a six figure loan. Remember that biglaw is neither guranteed nor stable. Once you get the job its all about navigating office politics, making sure thst you are sync with your practice group, making sure they dont back stab you. My friends sibling who is in biglaw told me how you need to do alot of research upfront before bidding biglaw. If you plan to practice in X group which has been lateraling often, theres a chance that you may not stay in thst group for long if you join. Also realize that besides gpa cutoffs and school preferences, biglaw firms require specific resume experiences. For example, some may favor law review over moot court.
I think it's most important to have a good LRAP. This is an option at top schools. For now...
@katieshuter1737 said:
Well here's my perspective, which is no doubt coloring my opinions: I'm the ex-wife of a Boalt grad (we were together during his law school years and three stints in different big law firms. I have spent way too much of my life thinking about law, it's safe to say :smile: ). 20 years ago, the full tuition was around $15K/year (which students complained about, haha) and cost of living in the Bay Area was about half of what it is now, and he started with a $265K big law salary at a time where even I walked into his firm and the hiring partner asked if I wanted a job on the spot (they were desperate for scientists in our field at the time). Now I wouldn't be able to cajole them into an informational interview bc there is a glut of applicants with my background. (Fortunately, I'm not looking for a big law job). My ex's in-house salary is now around $150K at a company and he has decades of work experience. He got to work in his choice of locations and pay off his debts bc of the timing of his schooling and job searches. Now tuition is tripled and it's harder to land big law jobs in his field and cost of living has gone up. I'm not convinced my ex would land a job in the Bay Area out of law school at this point especially with an increased debt load to repay (so he'd need a net higher income or lower cost of living). And it used to be you could bow out relatively easily from big law if it turned out it wasn't what you wanted to do, but now it's quite a big investment.
My assumption is that you folks (particularly the HYS crowd) will be very employable. I'm not at all trying to dissuade you from thinking that's the case. The only folks I know that were unemployed from among my T14 friends 20 years ago chose to be unemployed. I just worry about the students that go into any law school nowadays not understanding that $200k-300K really means you've invested in a particular long-term goal (landing a big salary job for which you would be paying $1-$2K/month above your cost of living to repay the debt over 10 years, which seems ok until you add a $3-5K/month mortgage or rent and $2K/month private preschool for each kid in the big cities), so either commit to doing all it will take to repay it (casting a wide net with your job search, hustling/networking, probably not going for PI jobs, maybe living lean for a while or marrying someone else who also works all the time or has a trust fund), or if you want to have the flexibility to do something else, do all you can to maximize scholarship money (better LSATs, or lesser schools counterbalanced with prior work experience/connections). People who chose either one of the scenarios in the latter camp aren't necessarily making a bad decision.
Anyway, this is advice I'd give my own kids. Good luck to all of you...
Yeah. All of my coworkers in other fields in medicine tell me to never underestimate the impact or a six figure loan. Remember that biglaw is neither guranteed nor stable. Once you get the job its all about navigating office politics, making sure thst you are sync with your practice group, making sure they dont back stab you. My friends sibling who is in biglaw told me how you need to do alot of research upfront before bidding biglaw. If you plan to practice in X group which has been lateraling often, theres a chance that you may not stay in thst group for long if you join. Also realize that besides gpa cutoffs and school preferences, biglaw firms require specific resume experiences. For example, some may favor law review over moot court.
Well here's my perspective, which is no doubt coloring my opinions: I'm the ex-wife of a Boalt grad (we were together during his law school years and three stints in different big law firms. I have spent way too much of my life thinking about law, it's safe to say :smile: ). 20 years ago, the full tuition was around $15K/year (which students complained about, haha) and cost of living in the Bay Area was about half of what it is now, and he started with a $265K big law salary at a time where even I walked into his firm and the hiring partner asked if I wanted a job on the spot (they were desperate for scientists in our field at the time). Now I wouldn't be able to cajole them into an informational interview bc there is a glut of applicants with my background. (Fortunately, I'm not looking for a big law job). My ex's in-house salary is now around $150K at a company and he has decades of work experience. He got to work in his choice of locations and pay off his debts bc of the timing of his schooling and job searches. Now tuition is tripled and it's harder to land big law jobs in his field and cost of living has gone up. I'm not convinced my ex would land a job in the Bay Area out of law school at this point especially with an increased debt load to repay (so he'd need a net higher income or lower cost of living). And it used to be you could bow out relatively easily from big law if it turned out it wasn't what you wanted to do, but now it's quite a big investment.
My assumption is that you folks (particularly the HYS crowd) will be very employable. I'm not at all trying to dissuade you from thinking that's the case. The only folks I know that were unemployed from among my T14 friends 20 years ago chose to be unemployed. I just worry about the students that go into any law school nowadays not understanding that $200k-300K really means you've invested in a particular long-term goal (landing a big salary job for which you would be paying $1-$2K/month above your cost of living to repay the debt over 10 years, which seems ok until you add a $3-5K/month mortgage or rent and $2K/month private preschool for each kid in the big cities), so either commit to doing all it will take to repay it (casting a wide net with your job search, hustling/networking, probably not going for PI jobs, maybe living lean for a while or marrying someone else who also works all the time or has a trust fund), or if you want to have the flexibility to do something else, do all you can to maximize scholarship money (better LSATs, or lesser schools counterbalanced with prior work experience/connections). People who chose either one of the scenarios in the latter camp aren't necessarily making a bad decision.
Anyway, this is advice I'd give my own kids. Good luck to all of you...
@alexwatsontremellen584 said:
@acsimon699 said:
@katieshuter1737 said:
$200K-$300K debt is risky for anyone, T14 or not. T14 is of course great overall if it works out financially, and pretty much essential if you want to be a law professor or high court judge. T14 or bust won't make sense for everyone though. For example, let's say you want to go to Big Law in SF in IP but you don't have an EE/CS degree. Even if you went to Harvard or Yale, for many IP jobs these days you would be easily edged out by a person from Santa Clara's part-time evening program with an EE/CS background who worked for a couple of years at Apple. There's pretty much no reason for that person from Santa Clara to forgo a huge scholarship in order to attend Harvard at full tuition in order to land that that kind of job. And once they're doing that job for a few years at a good firm, no one cares which school they attended. There's also a big sampling bias with the law school employment stats. The T14 attracts and cherry picks students that were employable based on their backgrounds alone. The problem with the lower ranked schools is they also admit a lot of students that they could pretty much guess would struggle but they need to make money to pay for the scholarships for the ones they are trying to lure in (sadly). It takes a bit of self awareness to know what you're really paying for in this admissions game and I think some folks just get wrapped up in identifying themselves with the schools/degree instead of what they ultimately want to do with their lives.
I mean, do many people agree with you on this? I think the strongest part of your claim is the EE/CS stuff but even that I'm skeptical of.
I think top schools do a pretty damn good job of determining which candidates are serious and which aren't, which are more serious relative to others for whatever reasons, etc. Of course, people fall through the cracks in any ranking system. Humans aren't perfect, adcomms are humans. I think most people who make it to the T14 made it there for a number of good/great reasons. Most also know what the debt they take on means.
It may have some merit. My friend works in biotech in nyc and the ceo actively seeks fordham lawyers for their IP department. These are all anecdotal of course.
Yeah, hard IP makes sense. I visited my state law school (very small, only 70 students per class, actually quite an interesting place doing interesting things in an admittedly tiny legal market) and I met with someone who planned to do hard IP stuff. He worked as a forensic scientist for a number of years prior. I think a lot of hard IP folks have hard science backgrounds because that was their first calling. Of course, this isn't the only way it could happen.
@acsimon699 said:
@katieshuter1737 said:
$200K-$300K debt is risky for anyone, T14 or not. T14 is of course great overall if it works out financially, and pretty much essential if you want to be a law professor or high court judge. T14 or bust won't make sense for everyone though. For example, let's say you want to go to Big Law in SF in IP but you don't have an EE/CS degree. Even if you went to Harvard or Yale, for many IP jobs these days you would be easily edged out by a person from Santa Clara's part-time evening program with an EE/CS background who worked for a couple of years at Apple. There's pretty much no reason for that person from Santa Clara to forgo a huge scholarship in order to attend Harvard at full tuition in order to land that that kind of job. And once they're doing that job for a few years at a good firm, no one cares which school they attended. There's also a big sampling bias with the law school employment stats. The T14 attracts and cherry picks students that were employable based on their backgrounds alone. The problem with the lower ranked schools is they also admit a lot of students that they could pretty much guess would struggle but they need to make money to pay for the scholarships for the ones they are trying to lure in (sadly). It takes a bit of self awareness to know what you're really paying for in this admissions game and I think some folks just get wrapped up in identifying themselves with the schools/degree instead of what they ultimately want to do with their lives.
I mean, do many people agree with you on this? I think the strongest part of your claim is the EE/CS stuff but even that I'm skeptical of.
I think top schools do a pretty damn good job of determining which candidates are serious and which aren't, which are more serious relative to others for whatever reasons, etc. Of course, people fall through the cracks in any ranking system. Humans aren't perfect, adcomms are humans. I think most people who make it to the T14 made it there for a number of good/great reasons. Most also know what the debt they take on means.
It may have some merit. My friend works in biotech in nyc and the ceo actively seeks fordham lawyers for their IP department. These are all anecdotal of course.
@katieshuter1737 said:
$200K-$300K debt is risky for anyone, T14 or not. T14 is of course great overall if it works out financially, and pretty much essential if you want to be a law professor or high court judge. T14 or bust won't make sense for everyone though. For example, let's say you want to go to Big Law in SF in IP but you don't have an EE/CS degree. Even if you went to Harvard or Yale, for many IP jobs these days you would be easily edged out by a person from Santa Clara's part-time evening program with an EE/CS background who worked for a couple of years at Apple. There's pretty much no reason for that person from Santa Clara to forgo a huge scholarship in order to attend Harvard at full tuition in order to land that that kind of job. And once they're doing that job for a few years at a good firm, no one cares which school they attended. There's also a big sampling bias with the law school employment stats. The T14 attracts and cherry picks students that were employable based on their backgrounds alone. The problem with the lower ranked schools is they also admit a lot of students that they could pretty much guess would struggle but they need to make money to pay for the scholarships for the ones they are trying to lure in (sadly). It takes a bit of self awareness to know what you're really paying for in this admissions game and I think some folks just get wrapped up in identifying themselves with the schools/degree instead of what they ultimately want to do with their lives.
I mean, do many people agree with you on this? I think the strongest part of your claim is the EE/CS stuff but even that I'm skeptical of.
I think top schools do a pretty damn good job of determining which candidates are serious and which aren't, which are more serious relative to others for whatever reasons, etc. Of course, people fall through the cracks in any ranking system. Humans aren't perfect, adcomms are humans. I think most people who make it to the T14 make it there for a number of good/great reasons. Most also know what it means to take on debt.
My last comment was just re being told a few months ago that I literally would not get into a single school with my GPA/LSAT. It wasn’t about financial security or t14s or the 2008 economy or whatever. There’s a diff bn saying “retake and get more scholarship money and job/financial security” vs “retake because you won’t get in to a single school you apply to with your current score”
$200K-$300K debt is risky for anyone, T14 or not. T14 is of course great overall if it works out financially, and pretty much essential if you want to be a law professor or high court judge. T14 or bust won't make sense for everyone though. For example, let's say you want to go to Big Law in SF in IP but you don't have an EE/CS degree. Even if you went to Harvard or Yale, for many IP jobs these days you would be easily edged out by a person from Santa Clara's part-time evening program with an EE/CS background who worked for a couple of years at Apple. There's pretty much no reason for that person from Santa Clara to forgo a huge scholarship in order to attend Harvard at full tuition in order to land that that kind of job. And once they're doing that job for a few years at a good firm, no one cares which school they attended. There's also a big sampling bias with the law school employment stats. The T14 attracts and cherry picks students that were employable based on their backgrounds alone. The problem with the lower ranked schools is they also admit a lot of students that they could pretty much guess would struggle but they need to make money to pay for the scholarships for the ones they are trying to lure in (sadly). It takes a bit of self awareness to know what you're really paying for in this admissions game and I think some folks just get wrapped up in identifying themselves with the schools/degree instead of what they ultimately want to do with their lives.
@leahbeuk911 - I would SO love to hear that you found something interesting to do related to PI that you could write about in your next round of applications rather than doing a paralegal cert. It's expensive (>$10K for the program - I took about 9 classes in the past thinking along your lines before stopping) and it will give you a job that will likely be clerical if you're entry level. But if you went to work with a non-profit or even volunteered on the side with an organization, you'd get connections in the PI work world. It's easier to get your foot in the door with connections now before they have to consider you for an attorney-level job. This could be a blessing in disguise down the road.
@tristandesinor505 said:
So I posted about my stats on TLS once and one commenter said "you wont get into any of the schools you applied to with those stats." I have in fact gotten into most of the schools I applied to. In at 3 UCs, and waitlisted at Fordham and UCLA. Still reapplying next year but seriously some of the TLS posters are aholes.
Alot of these posters were around the time when economy crashed in 2008. If you look at employment numbers around 2010, you will see that alot of schools have underperformed, including t14. Many t14 graduates at that time couldnt secure a job. So, their sentiment has some merit. I disagree with their delivery and they overexagerwte. There is one poster who keeps telling everyone to retake and that you have no chance of biglaw in boston college and ucla
So I posted about my stats on TLS once and one commenter said "you wont get into any of the schools you applied to with those stats." I have in fact gotten into most of the schools I applied to. In at 3 UCs, and waitlisted at Fordham and UCLA. Still reapplying next year but seriously some of the TLS posters are aholes.
@tristandesinor505 said:
My question isn't about making 200k a year
I think something helpful to do is see what an average outcome is from the school you're considering attending. Also, as mentioned above, definitely make sure to check out their 509 disclosures to check out their employment stats, too. What does someone who finishes with median grades end up doing?
Then, using a debt calculator, figure out what your student loan payments would be, and see if you would be okay financially with that outcome with the average salary of a grad from said school. Then look more closely at what types of jobs they are getting. Linkedin is a great resource for this as is mylsn. You have to remember that people who go to lower ranked schools and end up with high paying jobs, like in your examples, are outliers.
You also seem to be pretty knowledgable about the state of the legal market because of your experience. Is there any way to leverage your network to a possible job during your 2L summer or after graduation? They likely can't give you a definite answer, but it's something to maybe dig into a bit.
Also, I feel you on not wanting to retake the LSAT due to life circumstances. But if the option is another year working + living with your parents, and that nets you a score that will literally change the course of your life by allowing you to attend a school much better or with substantially lower cost, it's really something to consider. Even if you spend a year studying for a retake, and end up going to that same T60 school with more scholarship money, it's likely worth it.
Don't ever feel like if you can't get into a T14 school you shouldn't go to law school, though. You have to remember that TLS is a forum specifically for students interested in top law schools. So there is going to be tons of elitism and a healthy dose of realism. I've seen time and time again people succeed going to non-T14 schools. Enough people to know it's a feasible option. You just have to be smart, realistic, and prudent about what the best options available to you are.
@tristandesinor505 said:
@leahbeuk911 I have the same attitude. Although i’m not looking into PI. I want a t50 with a lot of merit$ in an area I want to live and continue to work in the future. With my bachelor’s in philosophy, there’s not much I can do but get teaching credentials and a master’s/PHD and teach, which I don’t want to do. Most people I know who got “practical” bachelor’s degrees are struggling. I could get a paralegal cert but most of the paralegals I know are even more stressed and have even more work to do than attorneys. A law degree, even from a t50, seems like the only thing I can do which will have earning potential in the future. It’s also something I’m passionate about and have always wanted to do, so I’m willing to take a risk...I think
@tristandesinor505 I think you're on the right track. You have your journey planned and are confident in your decision don't let the TLS forum get in your head. I think it's smart that you are going to a school well-known in your region. That will certainly aid in getting a job. A lot of schools who aren't T14 are popular in the region and many employers like to hire from them. For instance, here in Dallas SMU is immensely popular and I'm sure if I went to school there and did well I'd be able to land a job in the area even though it's ranked #46. If I wanted to stay in Dallas permanently, I'd consider SMU a viable option. But since I want the option to live and work anywhere, I prefer to go to a T14 school.
@tristandesinor505 said:
@acsimon699 My question isn't about making 200k a year
Do you want to go into BigLaw? Do you have enough money to cover tuition? What do you want to do after law school? How hard do you want to work?
@acsimon699 My question isn't about making 200k a year
Duke Law grads have a median starting salary of 180k, mid-career median salary of 220k. I think a lot of people who go to T14 end up making a lot of money their whole careers.
A lot of people go into public service because they want to, also.
To some extent whether or not you 'need' to go to a 'top' school depends on what you want to do. T14 offers the average graduate more than schools ranked lower. T3 can offer more to certain people than other schools still. Some people have legitimate reasons to attend certain schools over others within the T14, too.
Most importantly, people who say 'T14 or bust' aren't always trying to be cruel.
@71888 said:
@uhinberg359 said:
@71888 said:
For those of you interested in BigLaw. Would you all opt for t13 at sticker over a WashU with full tuition?
Depends on the T13, long term goals, and financial situation.
Are you BL or bust, or simply interested?
Is the T13 school(s) you are interested in located in an area you would like to live in for 3 years? How portable is this T13's degree? UT Austin, for example, doesn't place too great outside of Texas. Especially WRT to big law.
The average person stays in BL for under 2-3 years. So always keep that in mind.
WashU places like 30%+ into big law and for full tuition, I think it's a wonderful option. Most T13s at sticker will set you back 300k. If you're only going to likely be in BL for 3 years, you'll likely only be able pay off only part of that debt.
I've heard this frequently that most people only last a few years in biglaw. But even with that being the case, I think most people don't go from biglaw 170k to 50k. Generally they are able to lateral to another solid gig that pays a comparable wage.
You're right, they generally don't go from making 180k to 50k, but a 180k --> 85k certainly isn't uncommon.
You'd be surprised at the pay cut many, many associates take. I actually end up working with a good number of big law refuges in one capacity or another, and they probably end up making half of what they made at a market paying firm here in NYC, as VPs in-house at a bank. Many leave to go to "in-house" jobs that pay much better, but those still tend to pay significantly less. Further, the ones who tend to land the better paying gigs are generally the ones who stick it out to year three or later. It's also not uncommon for many people to leave the law all together after their stint in big law.
All this to say, don't bank on BL to pay off your loans to the point you make imprudent financial decisions.
I don't love TLS. I think a lot of the good information gets somewhat counteracted by the brazenly blanket statements and the undercurrent of elitism, and therefore often gets lost in the shuffle. But, I also have found that a lot of the people who take significant offense at what TLS spews out also tend to be the people who need to hear it most (though often there is an element of nuance that needs to be introduced to properly frame the discussion).
When TLS sneers at a 50% employment rate and treats it like it's garbage, it's a necessary counterbalance to the person who thinks "of course" they'll get one. TLS talks like only T14 kids go to biglaw, which is a necessary counterbalance to the people who look at law firm partners that went to now mediocre-or-worse schools and have no clue that the employment environment is completely different now than it was 30 years ago. TLS loves talking about raw numbers, which is a necessary counterbalance to the cherry-picked anecdotal evidence that people often use to convince themselves they're making a good choice despite objective evidence to the contrary.
And to be perfectly honest, there are a LOT more people who have convinced themselves that they're god's gift to law school and that they're just being held back by _______ (the evil LSAT, that one bad semester, their unreasonable professors, their circumstances...) and that once they have the proper opportunity to 'show everyone' they'll be locked into success than there are people who have realistic outlooks on the cost-benefit analysis.
Unfortunately in life, people will often give you good nuggets of feedback wrapped in terrible, rude delivery. I don't like that and wish people would quit being pricks. But I also think if you can't glean the relevant information and separate your emotions from your rationality, that's totally on you.
So yeah. Take it seriously. Just don't take it uncritically.
@uhinberg359 said:
@71888 said:
For those of you interested in BigLaw. Would you all opt for t13 at sticker over a WashU with full tuition?
Depends on the T13, long term goals, and financial situation.
Are you BL or bust, or simply interested?
Is the T13 school(s) you are interested in located in an area you would like to live in for 3 years? How portable is this T13's degree? UT Austin, for example, doesn't place too great outside of Texas. Especially WRT to big law.
The average person stays in BL for under 2-3 years. So always keep that in mind.
WashU places like 30%+ into big law and for full tuition, I think it's a wonderful option. Most T13s at sticker will set you back 300k. If you're only going to likely be in BL for 3 years, you'll likely only be able pay off only part of that debt.
I've heard this frequently that most people only last a few years in biglaw. But even with that being the case, I think most people don't go from biglaw 170k to 50k. Generally they are able to lateral to another solid gig that pays a comparable wage.
@tristandesinor505 said:
@katieshuter1737 said:
I was so discouraged by the aggression and competitiveness on that forum, and haven't visited it since. IDK, that's just my two cents on that site.
I’m so sorry to hear your experience! There is so much negativity on that site...
@tristandesinor505 said:
I think it's just a matter of preference. I don't like that kind of attitude and prefer to avoid it, so I stay away from TLS and other forums. I've had bad experiences and read shocking things.
I really don’t like that kind of attitude and prefer to avoid it too.
Plus I don’t like forums powered by phpBB®. They are so 2001.lol
@tristandesinor505 said:
It's not like we are even really all arguing different things. The consensus for OP was to be careful, do research, and participate in a cost/benefit before making a decision. We're all agreeing here, it's because we're all so awesome :)
My 7Sage crew!
https://media1.tenor.com/images/ddff032666ac8fd1a7f25447d81a3e8f/tenor.gif?itemid=5207377
https://media.giphy.com/media/p9O75RBS946He/giphy.gif
Since we're on the theme ...
https://media.giphy.com/media/5yLgocdBwy0leJe89R6/giphy.gif
@tristandesinor505 said:
@acsimon699 said:
Not everyone on TLS is an asshole. You guys can figure out who's who if you really care to. There is a lot of useful information on there. Anecdotes may not always be useful indicators of anything, but sometimes they can be.
I think it's just a matter of preference. I don't like that kind of attitude and prefer to avoid it, so I stay away from TLS and other forums. I've had bad experiences and read shocking things.
It also has amazing information with a lot of really intelligent and helpful people. Each user might face a different experience and be looking for a different thing. No point in arguing about which forum is good/bad because it's so subjective.
It's not like we are even really all arguing different things. The consensus for OP was to be careful, do research, and participate in a cost/benefit before making a decision. We're all agreeing here, it's because we're all so awesome :)
My 7Sage crew!
https://media1.tenor.com/images/ddff032666ac8fd1a7f25447d81a3e8f/tenor.gif?itemid=5207377
^ Yes, that.
https://media.giphy.com/media/DQ94PFPPETZCM/giphy.gif