molloyboytoy wrote:Since you asked for it, you said "I'd make the same decision because I'd rather live in Atlanta". That means it was worth it to you ,for whatever reason to elect to take 50K in debt like the OP to go to Emory.
WTF? It may have been worth it to me for quality of life considerations. However, it wouldn't have been 50k, since I have family in Atlanta which meant that I wouldn't have had to pay for a place to live. That would have made it more like 20k. If you feel an extra 50k (or even 150k) translates to a better quality of life that you prefer, by all means go ahead - quality of life determinations are highly individualistic and subjective.
Then your argument that it's insanity to go to Emory at sticker price is severely weakened if it's only 50K more. Further, that means it's not crazy or foolish to do so, if location isn't a crazy factor for subsuming large amounts of debt. You admit that 50k debt for location is plausible even preferrable to you, then what's another 50K for better job opportunities, lay prestige etc (placement numbers/ hiring firms, US news ranking). It makes your argument that sticker price is foolish weak. If you can afford it within your personal parameters of 50K debt (which is the majority of Emory students) then it's not insane or foolish to attend Emory, in fact it can be preferrable.
Incoherent blurb from Emory muppet is incoherent, but I'll give it a shot anyway. But since we're doing this: this idea that Emory confers some kind of lay prestige is absurd nonsense. Since you've been unable to understand this, I'm going to go point by point, and use small words so that you can comprehend this.
1. At either school, your class rank will matter much, much more than where you got your degree from. Most employers will have the exact same grade cutoff for either school. Do you understand what this means? It means employers view the schools identically - they do not differentiate between the two schools. This means that a given candidate's grades will determine whether he gets a screening interview, and once you get to the interview your personality is what determines whether or not you get the job.
2. I don't think you understand how debilitating student loan debt is. 100k in debt means you're paying anywhere between 1k and 1.5k per month for 10-15 years. That's a lot of money for a very long time. To put it to you simply: 10 years ago was pre-9/11, and you were in the sixth grade.
3. OCI data on NALP says that UGA will have 110 firms interviewing in 2011, whereas Emory will have 104. This does not include UGA's marked advantage in Article III clerkships, plus small firm type jobs. While NALP admittedly doesn't include things like Emory's NY interview program, Emory's placement in NYC and DC the last few years has been abysmal. One can seriously argue that the opportunities for the two schools are virtually identical. I'd say the only place where an Emory grad might have an advantage is 1L OCI, but that's only because of UGA's retarded 1L grading system. But that affects maybe five people in the entire class at either school, because that's the number of people that have a shot at biglaw jobs 1L year.
4. This rubbish about "lay prestige" has to stop. Emory grads are rightly viewed as pretentious twits in Atlanta - the consulting firm I worked for before law school stopped hiring Emory grads (both undergrad and MBA) because they were so entitled and lazy. We found that Georgia Tech grads were far smarter, much more hard working, and generally more competent. Plus, it's not as if having Emory on your wall is going to get you laid. You're going to a second-rate private school, not Harvard.
In addition, stats show that Emory has an advantage over UGA in virtually every important area, as I've highlighted a hundred times.
Except for judicial clerkships, where UGA is substantially better, and biglaw placement in Atlanta, where UGA is slightly better, and biglaw's grade cutoffs for both schools, which are essentially identical. Those are fairly important areas. And average student debt at graduation.
So, I believe that my initial argument that Emory is slightly better than UGA is completely logical and I believe that with your position that it's worth 50K debt for location (in some situation) weakens your argument that another 50K for the other intangibles mentioned above is insane.
Wait, so you're saying that just because I think it's ok to spend an extra 50k for quality of life considerations that are personal to me that I should also think that it's reasonable to spend another 50k for this mysterious "lay prestige"? Seems like an absurd argument - you haven't substantiated anything else except for a random employer survey where they talked about school reputations, but even that isn't borne out by who employers actually hire.