UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )

Where does your boy go to school?

UCLA @ 43.5K
20
67%
UW @ 24K
10
33%
 
Total votes: 30

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Tue May 18, 2010 6:19 pm

TLS.

I made a thread on this earlier, and people were all like: Daesonesb: Go to UW in state. Tuition is 24K per year and you are OK with living in Seattle or Portland.

Thing is, UCLA just wrote, and now I'm getting 6.5 k in grants for 2010-2011.
I'm out of state this year, so that puts my overall Tuition/Fees/Health Insurance to 43.5 K for the first year.
Assuming (big assumption) I get the grant for years two and three, it would be 33.5K.

This offer has no contingency.

Given the new info, what do you all think? I'm considering...
Last edited by daesonesb on Tue May 18, 2010 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
D. H2Oman
Posts: 7469
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 5:47 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby D. H2Oman » Tue May 18, 2010 6:21 pm

I'd take UCLA

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Tue May 18, 2010 6:24 pm

D. H2Oman wrote:I'd take UCLA
Last edited by daesonesb on Sun Jul 17, 2011 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Wed May 19, 2010 6:03 pm

final bump.
Love the input. The result of this poll is entirely different from the last poll I did, suggesting I either have a different sample of posters this time, OR, the money I'm getting is playing a part in yall's decision.

User avatar
Regionality
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:13 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby Regionality » Wed May 19, 2010 6:06 pm

daesonesb wrote:final bump.
Love the input. The result of this poll is entirely different from the last poll I did, suggesting I either have a different sample of posters this time, OR, the money I'm getting is playing a part in yall's decision.


can one double-apostrophize a word? Because I woulda though it would have been "y'all's" but that looks so funny.

I say UW in state. UCLA is also going to probably become more more expensive than other tuition increases because of state budget crisis...

User avatar
Burberry by Burberry
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:43 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby Burberry by Burberry » Wed May 19, 2010 6:23 pm

Isn't the COL higher in LA than in Seattle?

$130,500 + COL @ UCLA or possibly $143,500 + COL @ UCLA
$72,000 + COL @ UW

Either way, you're looking at a lot of debt.

Based on what you mentioned in your first post, I'd say UW.

User avatar
Regionality
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 5:13 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby Regionality » Wed May 19, 2010 6:30 pm

Burberry by Burberry wrote:Isn't the COL higher in LA than in Seattle?

$130,500 + COL @ UCLA or possibly $143,500 + COL @ UCLA
$72,000 + COL @ UW

Either way, you're looking at a lot of debt.

Based on what you mentioned in your first post, I'd say UW.


Let's not forget that basically every student after their first year qualifies for in-state tuition in California.

However, UCLA's in-state tuition could easily rise 10% next year because of reduced funds from the state, meaning 2L tuition for OP could be 35,200 plus 3,500 in tuition increase, which equals 38,700 2L tuition then probably around 42,000 3L tuition. Add that to a higher COL and attending UCLA becomes even more prohibitively expensive.

Edited for math.

User avatar
Burberry by Burberry
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 1:43 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby Burberry by Burberry » Wed May 19, 2010 6:51 pm

Regionality wrote:
Burberry by Burberry wrote:Isn't the COL higher in LA than in Seattle?

$130,500 + COL @ UCLA or possibly $143,500 + COL @ UCLA
$72,000 + COL @ UW

Either way, you're looking at a lot of debt.

Based on what you mentioned in your first post, I'd say UW.


Let's not forget that basically every student after their first year qualifies for in-state tuition in California.

However, UCLA's in-state tuition could easily rise 10% next year because of reduced funds from the state, meaning 2L tuition for OP could be 35,200 plus 3,500 in tuition increase, which equals 38,700 2L tuition then probably around 42,000 3L tuition. Add that to a higher COL and attending UCLA becomes even more prohibitively expensive.

Edited for math.

I forgot residency was so easy to gain in California.

It doesn't matter for my vote: OP and gf have family in the Seattle area and OP would like to work in Canada someday, thus UW.

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Wed May 19, 2010 8:55 pm

Burberry by Burberry wrote:
Regionality wrote:
Burberry by Burberry wrote:Isn't the COL higher in LA than in Seattle?

$130,500 + COL @ UCLA or possibly $143,500 + COL @ UCLA
$72,000 + COL @ UW

Either way, you're looking at a lot of debt.

Based on what you mentioned in your first post, I'd say UW.


Let's not forget that basically every student after their first year qualifies for in-state tuition in California.

However, UCLA's in-state tuition could easily rise 10% next year because of reduced funds from the state, meaning 2L tuition for OP could be 35,200 plus 3,500 in tuition increase, which equals 38,700 2L tuition then probably around 42,000 3L tuition. Add that to a higher COL and attending UCLA becomes even more prohibitively expensive.

Edited for math.

I forgot residency was so easy to gain in California.

It doesn't matter for my vote: OP and gf have family in the Seattle area and OP would like to work in Canada someday, thus UW.


Not exactly true. I said in the last thread it was something I'd consider. I'm not wedded to working anywhere in particular.

the math as I see it is:

1L UCLA: 43.5, UW: 24
2L UCLA In-State: 43.5 (Minus 6.5?), UW: 25 (Tuition will likely rise @ UW too)
3L UCLA In-State: 45 (minus 6.5?), UW: 26

Tuition Totals
UCLA: 119k - 132k
UW: 75k

We can also guess that I'm going to need 4k a year more in COL @ UCLA, so that makes a difference of $57,000 - $69,000 over three years.

The big question is: Does my lifetime earning power with a UCLA degree justify this tuition difference?

User avatar
sanpiero
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:09 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby sanpiero » Wed May 19, 2010 9:04 pm

do you want to practice in CA or WA?

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Wed May 19, 2010 9:08 pm

sanpiero wrote:do you want to practice in CA or WA?


I'd do either. I'm OK with being anywhere on the West Coast. I don't want the east coast which is why I withdrew cornell.

User avatar
sanpiero
Posts: 574
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:09 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby sanpiero » Wed May 19, 2010 9:27 pm

daesonesb wrote:
sanpiero wrote:do you want to practice in CA or WA?


I'd do either. I'm OK with being anywhere on the West Coast. I don't want the east coast which is why I withdrew cornell.


If being able to place in CA isn't a primary concern, I would go to UW. From what I hear, seattle is an awesome place to live. On top of that, you will save a bunch of money and get virtually the same education.

User avatar
jcl2
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:27 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby jcl2 » Thu May 20, 2010 11:04 am

I still say UW. Same reasons I have mentioned before. 6.5K in grants isn't all that much. You would have a better chance at biglaw from UCLA, but it is far from a guarantee, and it would be tough to deal with debt close to 200k without a biglaw salary. 100-120k in debt is a lot, but it is considerably more manageable than 200k; ~$500 per month payments if you stretch out the repayment period vs. $1000+.

Most importantly, I think you will miss the NW if you leave, and you will want to come back in three years, in which case you should have just gone to UW, because UCLA will give you no advantage at all for finding a job up here.

Really, you are going to be in good shape either way, your options are pretty good. Have you visited both schools and really thought about where you would be happy and where you want to live (during and after law school)? I know you have said you would be happy ending up anywhere on the west coast, but where would you prefer to end up, or even where would you prefer to spend your next three years? Make your decision based on those factors.

JOThompson
Posts: 1311
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2009 3:16 am

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby JOThompson » Thu May 20, 2010 11:10 am

I would choose UCLA. It seems to place better in its market than U-Dub does in Seattle. Some UW grads find the Seattle/PNW market to be too small and they ultimately have to leave the region to find a decent first job.

User avatar
daesonesb
Posts: 499
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:18 pm

Re: UCLA (OOS $$$) vs. UW In state

Postby daesonesb » Thu May 20, 2010 11:22 pm

Thanks for all the responses folks.

I already did UW's ASD, and I liked it...
I'm gonna visit UCLA early june, and make my final choice right at the deposit deadline.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest