latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

(Rankings, Profiles, Tuition, Student Life, . . . )
lawlcat4179
Posts: 66
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 6:01 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby lawlcat4179 » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:33 pm

t14fanboy wrote:
lawlcat4179 wrote:
Desert Fox wrote:
lawlcat4179 wrote:What I think you'll find is that if you have less debt and go into shitlaw after law school, 10 years down the road you will be in a better financial position than if you went to NU and landed biglaw.


Unless you flame out of big law in under 2 years I really doubt this is true.


I'm basing it off of a huge scholly at a T30 that would leave you with about 50-70k in debt. Basically, if he could get WUSTL to up the scholly to 90k over 3 years.

If you go into shitlaw, isn't it pretty realistic to think that at year 10 you are making roughly 100k? Also, the money made from shitlaw could go into savings, which would be earning you interest, instead of the other way around. Also, I was basing it off of a 4 year exit from biglaw.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that, even if you wind up in shitlaw, you won't be in that much different of financial shape than going into biglaw debt peonage for 4 years to break even, then starting your career.

Once you figure into the equation such things as cost of living differences (assuming shitlaw is in a lower COL area), and the increased taxation that someone in biglaw would be making, the difference between the two becomes even more pronounced.


LOL.


Okay, so after 10 years of shitlaw, what would be your more accurate guess? I was under the impression that shitlaw is considerably easier to make partner. I figured partners at shitlaw firms would make slightly above 100k, which, when averaged with those who don't make partner, would average out at about 100k per year.

lobolawyer
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2011 4:26 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby lobolawyer » Fri Mar 23, 2012 7:41 pm

dixiecupdrinking wrote:Don't go to law school to be rich. If you end up capable of comfortably paying your debts and living a reasonably comfortable life, will you be satisfied? I really think that is a reasonable ceiling for 95% of law students. Don't expect more.


This is true. However, it also depends on your definition of rich. If you come from a family that lives in public housing and has a household income under $30k, making upwards of $80k/yr might be rich to you and most of the ppl you know.

RodneyBoonfield
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:54 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby RodneyBoonfield » Fri Mar 23, 2012 8:42 pm

ryemanhattan wrote:Plan B/C: my gf is from New Zealand, so I could move to Auckland and open a bar in a year or two and/or go get an MBA in a couple of years for $7k/ year once I am a permanent resident. But I love this country, and I don't want to run. The idea of not spending much money on health care or education for the rest of my life, however, is compelling. We are in decline, yes. But I'd rather stay and try and help this country function than take off just because I have an out.


LOL.

Seriously, bro?

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby MrAnon » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:05 pm

bernaldiaz wrote:Dear NYT,

Please keep publishing these articles.

Signed,

Someone applying next cycle


This is like an aspiring blacksmith at the end of the Iron Age hoping that fewer will apply to blacksmith school and thus give him an edge in an environment where there is almost no market for his trade.

RodneyBoonfield
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:54 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby RodneyBoonfield » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:12 pm

MrAnon wrote:
bernaldiaz wrote:Dear NYT,

Please keep publishing these articles.

Signed,

Someone applying next cycle


This is like an aspiring blacksmith at the end of the Iron Age hoping that fewer will apply to blacksmith school and thus give him an edge in an environment where there is almost no market for his trade.


what

ryemanhattan
Posts: 121
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2011 10:31 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby ryemanhattan » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:53 pm

RodneyBoonfield wrote:
ryemanhattan wrote:Plan B/C: my gf is from New Zealand, so I could move to Auckland and open a bar in a year or two and/or go get an MBA in a couple of years for $7k/ year once I am a permanent resident. But I love this country, and I don't want to run. The idea of not spending much money on health care or education for the rest of my life, however, is compelling. We are in decline, yes. But I'd rather stay and try and help this country function than take off just because I have an out.


LOL.

Seriously, bro?


Yeah. for serious. I see very little reason to be optimistic about the US in the next decade. Politically and economically I think things will get worse before they get better.

But I'll feel like kind of a chump leaving because I think things are about to get rough. I didn't mean to imply that the fate of the nation hangs on whether I move abroad. Or that by going to law school I will save the US from it's political psychoses.

User avatar
LogicalBaozi
Posts: 63
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 7:44 am

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby LogicalBaozi » Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:11 am

MrAnon wrote:
bernaldiaz wrote:Dear NYT,

Please keep publishing these articles.

Signed,

Someone applying next cycle


This is like an aspiring blacksmith at the end of the Iron Age hoping that fewer will apply to blacksmith school and thus give him an edge in an environment where there is almost no market for his trade.


Are you a troll, or just fucking retarded?


The iron age in Europe during the Dark Ages, like 400-500AD iirc. Blacksmiths plied their trade, and there was ALWAYS work for a blacksmith, up until industrial processes could produce high quality steel. That means blacksmiths have a huge market up until the 17-19th centuries, depending on the craft. They continued in niche industries until machining was precise enough to replace them. Even ignoring this period, becoming a blacksmith was pretty much guaranteed employment until the end of the Medieval period, Renaissance, and beyond. Your analogy is forgetting over 1000 years of history. That, sir, is a crime.

Stick to the buggy-whip/car analogy, please.

Edit: Forgot to mention that many blacksmiths were trained through apprenticeships, if I've learned anything from Skyrim and tons of other fantasy games/novels. Also, it isn't a crime to screw up analogies, especially when their meaning is readily apparent. At least not in this jurisdiction. But it should be. It should be.

RobotGardener
Posts: 37
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:34 am

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby RobotGardener » Sat Mar 24, 2012 3:40 am

ryemanhattan wrote:
RodneyBoonfield wrote:
ryemanhattan wrote:Plan B/C: my gf is from New Zealand, so I could move to Auckland and open a bar in a year or two and/or go get an MBA in a couple of years for $7k/ year once I am a permanent resident. But I love this country, and I don't want to run. The idea of not spending much money on health care or education for the rest of my life, however, is compelling. We are in decline, yes. But I'd rather stay and try and help this country function than take off just because I have an out.


LOL.

Seriously, bro?


Yeah. for serious. I see very little reason to be optimistic about the US in the next decade. Politically and economically I think things will get worse before they get better.

But I'll feel like kind of a chump leaving because I think things are about to get rough. I didn't mean to imply that the fate of the nation hangs on whether I move abroad. Or that by going to law school I will save the US from it's political psychoses.


You sound retarded. Is this how you talk in real life?

User avatar
kerflux
Posts: 196
Joined: Fri Nov 04, 2011 9:58 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby kerflux » Sat Mar 24, 2012 8:26 am

LogicalBaozi wrote:Are you a troll, or just fucking retarded?


The iron age in Europe during the Dark Ages, like 400-500AD iirc. Blacksmiths plied their trade, and there was ALWAYS work for a blacksmith, up until industrial processes could produce high quality steel. That means blacksmiths have a huge market up until the 17-19th centuries, depending on the craft. They continued in niche industries until machining was precise enough to replace them. Even ignoring this period, becoming a blacksmith was pretty much guaranteed employment until the end of the Medieval period, Renaissance, and beyond. Your analogy is forgetting over 1000 years of history. That, sir, is a crime.
[/i]


DUH. I fucking hate it when people misrepresent the historical lineage of blacksmithing in analogies describing the current legal market :/

MrAnon
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 9:08 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby MrAnon » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:21 am

LogicalBaozi wrote:
MrAnon wrote:
bernaldiaz wrote:Dear NYT,

Please keep publishing these articles.

Signed,

Someone applying next cycle


This is like an aspiring blacksmith at the end of the Iron Age hoping that fewer will apply to blacksmith school and thus give him an edge in an environment where there is almost no market for his trade.


Are you a troll, or just fucking retarded?


The iron age in Europe during the Dark Ages, like 400-500AD iirc. Blacksmiths plied their trade, and there was ALWAYS work for a blacksmith, up until industrial processes could produce high quality steel. That means blacksmiths have a huge market up until the 17-19th centuries, depending on the craft. They continued in niche industries until machining was precise enough to replace them. Even ignoring this period, becoming a blacksmith was pretty much guaranteed employment until the end of the Medieval period, Renaissance, and beyond. Your analogy is forgetting over 1000 years of history. That, sir, is a crime.

Stick to the buggy-whip/car analogy, please.

Edit: Forgot to mention that many blacksmiths were trained through apprenticeships, if I've learned anything from Skyrim and tons of other fantasy games/novels. Also, it isn't a crime to screw up analogies, especially when their meaning is readily apparent. At least not in this jurisdiction. But it should be. It should be.


get a life. you get the point.

User avatar
flem
Posts: 12949
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 6:44 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby flem » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:22 am

t14fanboy wrote:
lawlcat4179 wrote:
I'm basing it off of a huge scholly at a T30 that would leave you with about 50-70k in debt. Basically, if he could get WUSTL to up the scholly to 90k over 3 years.

If you go into shitlaw, isn't it pretty realistic to think that at year 10 you are making roughly 100k? Also, the money made from shitlaw could go into savings, which would be earning you interest, instead of the other way around. Also, I was basing it off of a 4 year exit from biglaw.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make is that, even if you wind up in shitlaw, you won't be in that much different of financial shape than going into biglaw debt peonage for 4 years to break even, then starting your career.

Once you figure into the equation such things as cost of living differences (assuming shitlaw is in a lower COL area), and the increased taxation that someone in biglaw would be making, the difference between the two becomes even more pronounced.


LOL.


That's actually about right. If you're an associate at a small firm you'd be partner 10 years in, unless you're a total idiot.

RodneyBoonfield
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 6:54 pm

Re: latest doom and gloom NYT article on law school prospects

Postby RodneyBoonfield » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:56 am

MrAnon wrote:get a life. you get the point.


If I understand your analogy correctly, it sounds to me like you're saying that the age in which there is a need for lawyers is ending due to to changes in technology, and thus the legal profession is dying.

Or are you just simply trying to say that the market is saturated because there are more lawyers than job? If so, its a bad analogy.




Return to “Choosing a Law School”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests