Lowest Ranked School You Would Attend at Sticker? Forum

[kapital98]

At least UT.

Let's see:
In-state tuition
Assumptions: I have a 1% chance to be at the top 1% of the class and a 1% chance to be at the 50th% of the class. (I still don't believe but I am a 0L)
Biglaw chances = based on NLJ250 chances = 145k salary situated in Texas = 4 year stint
8% IR on loans
4.5% IR on FV
UT: 22% chance at biglaw

Debt at the end of year 3: 154.268928 (44x1.08^3+44x1.08^2+44x1.08)

Current job prospects: Year 1: 18,000 Year 2: 35,000 Year 3: 40,000
COL: 11k/year
Savings: 7k/24k/29k
after Taxes savings: 4k/17.5k/21k


4000 x 1.045 ^2 + 17,500x 1.045 + 21,000 = $43655.6 savings lost due to attendance, accounted for interest and taxes and COL

So cost of attendance (including debt)= 154k + 43.5k = 198k

I don't know anything at all about employment prospects during the summers of LS but that could cause a giant dent to this number in both principle and taxes.


198k

Biglaw chance = 22%.
145,000 after tax = 104k
COL = 11k
93k after tax income savings

Assumption for other job: ~24k

69,000/1.045
69,000/1.045^2
69,000/1.045^3
69,000/1.045^4

= $187,135 x .22 =

Worth 41,169 after interest and probability are accounted for

198 - 41 = 157,000

45 year lifespan of work
157,000 to pay off (I don't want to do it by hand and make the first 4 variables @ 80%, so deal with the slight overassumption of value)


http://www.investopedia.com/calculator/ ... z2E4EnnuWY
n = 45
r = 4.5
payment = 8000
PV = 153,000
Let's make it 8500 to account for the lack of .8 variable for the first 4 periods


So on average, will you make $8,500 more dollars per year from your job after biglaw/nonbiglaw job from graduation than if you didn't attend lawschool?

Considering with my current degree, my best job prospects are sales related to life planning, I would say this is not even a question.

UT at sticker, in-state is a no-brainer for me

Nice Analysis

[John_rizzy_rawls]

Unconditionally: HYS.

Conditionally:

Columbia, if and only if, I were accepted to the joint JD/MPP program with the Woodrow Wilson School of Public Policy at Princeton.

NYU, if and only if, I were accepted to their JD/PhD in Legal Philosophy program with RONALD F'IN DWORKIN.

Penn, if and only if, I were accepted to their JD/MBA @ Wharton program.

For me, and me alone, these 5 scenarios would justify sticker due to their connections, opportunities, flexibility, and interests in what I specifically would like to conceivably do.

[dingbat]

when I proposed this a while back, and built a workable draft, there seemed to be very little interest. Unfortunately, people don't want to think about the practical aspects of law school

The last thing you said was actually interesting. Do you mind giving a link to your proposal? It doesn't matter if other people are not interested. The intrinsic value of being an attorney is still an important variable (one of many).

anyone who wants a copy, just PM me your email and I'll send it out later. Like I said, it's a workable draft. I got a few good suggestions for improvement, but ended up really busy at work and there seemed very little interest, so it kind fell by the wayside

[hume85]

The funny thing about this question is that the sticker cost of the school can actually make the lower ranked option a lot better. For example, paying in state sticker at Texas, UGA, Alabama, or UNC is a better decision than paying sticker at Georgetown, UVA, or Michigan in a lot of ways.

No way Jose. GT (33.5% biglaw, 3.9% fed clerkship), UVA (37% Biglaw, 10.6% fed clerkship) , and MI (34% biglaw, 10.6% fed clerkship) are all much better choices than UGA (8.8% biglaw, 7.5% fed clerkship), Alabama (9.8% biglaw, 8.5% fed clerkship), UNC (13% biglaw, 4.5% fed clerkship). In-state tuition does not justify the ~20% difference between the two "tiers."

Where did you get those GT and UVA stats? They don't look too impressive.

Dems the truf. Lawschooltransparency.com

I know UVA's numbers look better when you take law firms of >50 attorneys+fed clerkship. I don't think you are going to find many shitlaw firms in that category other than some large insurance defense firms.

[drive4showLSAT4dough]

Where is Chickensoup?? I'd appreciate his opinion on this topic.

[cahwc12]

I'd consider GW sticker if I could attend part-time while working at USPTO or some similarly nice EE IP-stepping job.

If I were to attend full-time at sticker price, the only schools that would be in contention for me would be Florida, Florida State, Georgia, and Alabama due to competing in-state tuition waivers (assuming that doesn't count against sticker). And I don't think I would attend any of those schools at resident sticker.

My numbers notwithstanding, the only school I'd pay sticker at would be Stanford, and it would be a tough decision (since with numbers competitive for Stanford I could attend GW or UT full ride).

Law school is too damned expensive at sticker.

[BigZuck]

At least UT.

Let's see:
In-state tuition
Assumptions: I have a 1% chance to be at the top 1% of the class and a 1% chance to be at the 50th% of the class. (I still don't believe but I am a 0L)
Biglaw chances = based on NLJ250 chances = 145k salary situated in Texas = 4 year stint
8% IR on loans
4.5% IR on FV
UT: 22% chance at biglaw

Debt at the end of year 3: 154.268928 (44x1.08^3+44x1.08^2+44x1.08)

Current job prospects: Year 1: 18,000 Year 2: 35,000 Year 3: 40,000
COL: 11k/year
Savings: 7k/24k/29k
after Taxes savings: 4k/17.5k/21k


4000 x 1.045 ^2 + 17,500x 1.045 + 21,000 = $43655.6 savings lost due to attendance, accounted for interest and taxes and COL

So cost of attendance (including debt)= 154k + 43.5k = 198k

I don't know anything at all about employment prospects during the summers of LS but that could cause a giant dent to this number in both principle and taxes.


198k

Biglaw chance = 22%.
145,000 after tax = 104k
COL = 11k
93k after tax income savings

Assumption for other job: ~24k

69,000/1.045
69,000/1.045^2
69,000/1.045^3
69,000/1.045^4

= $187,135 x .22 =

Worth 41,169 after interest and probability are accounted for

198 - 41 = 157,000

45 year lifespan of work
157,000 to pay off (I don't want to do it by hand and make the first 4 variables @ 80%, so deal with the slight overassumption of value)


http://www.investopedia.com/calculator/ ... z2E4EnnuWY
n = 45
r = 4.5
payment = 8000
PV = 153,000
Let's make it 8500 to account for the lack of .8 variable for the first 4 periods


So on average, will you make $8,500 more dollars per year from your job after biglaw/nonbiglaw job from graduation than if you didn't attend lawschool?

Considering with my current degree, my best job prospects are sales related to life planning, I would say this is not even a question.

UT at sticker, in-state is a no-brainer for me

As someone with a shit job, instate tuition at UT, and a decent scholarship, this analysis makes my heart sing.

[cahwc12]

sinfiery, how do you factor in the likelihood that you will be laid off at some point early in your career at a firm? Or simply being unemployed or underemployed between law jobs as a result of being laid off?

[dingbat]

My numbers notwithstanding, the only school I'd pay sticker at would be Stanford, and it would be a tough decision (since with numbers competitive for Stanford I could attend GW or UT full ride).

If you can get into Stanford, you can get a full ride at better schools than GW

[BarbellDreams]

When I was a 1L on TLS I answered this exact same thread with Fordham. As a 3L my answer has changed to Vanderbilt.

[justonemoregame]

Which law school is worth attending at sticker is purely a function of what a particular applicant’s other options are.

If we say, hypothetically, that the best pay a college graduate is going to find in the current job market, with their dime-a-dozen degree and their “experience” “utilizing” their “skills” is like $10 or $12 or $14 per hour (which IMO is laughably optimistic for the average grad), how can these people be faulted for taking a gamble at a T35 with some 15-20% shot at a large firm job?

The new rules for IBR – PAYE, will cap their post-grad loan payments at 10% of discretionary spending, defined as blah blah blah, skipping to examples:

Max. monthly payment (regardless of how much you took out in loans for law school) on annual income of:

30K is $110
40K is $194
50K is $277

Under the current rules, this represents the worst-case scenario for people who, by and large, have considerably worse prospects than this upon graduating college. Even if the PAYE program is scaled back, so what? Even if a person has to pay *double* these rates, that’s still better than $12 per hour. So what if the program is altogether eliminated? Are you telling me that my life will then bank a hard right and all of a sudden become a grind? Because that’s what I’m looking at right now and into the foreseeable future.

Remember when MTal used to encourage people to go work their way up at Target instead of attending law school? That’s because he knew that Target’s starting pay was no worse than the overwhelming majority of jobs available to people – that is, he couldn’t make the argument that college grads should just join up in some other industry offering rapid mobility with their euro-style benefits because they are largely non-existent.

Another problem with this is the decision timeline for most people. If a person had 2-3 years to figure out whether a non-law school course of action might work in the long run, that’d be great. But unfortunately, they have to figure out how to pay their bills now, and that can be a bitch on min wage - $10 per hour. Q: Should a person go to law school solely to escape their present financial burden? A: Ask again when they’re dead.

TLDR – PAYE might be shitty policy and a prime example of how rational beings should not govern themselves, but you can’t fault people for taking out sticker debt for schools like Notre Dame, BC, something with a ‘Washington’ in it, etc.

Having the opportunity to call a number 1-6 and roll the die one time for a large firm job, and then roll it 3 more times for some other reasonable form of employment, is better than scrambling from minimum wage to $10 per hour, and then maybe finding a decent job, only then to live under fear of that job being eliminated, the chances of which are perhaps equal to the odds of PAYE being completely scrapped. Especially when the two other numbers represent better situations than the one in which you presently find yourself.

[dingbat]

TLDR – PAYE might be shitty policy and a prime example of how rational beings should not govern themselves, but you can’t fault people for taking out sticker debt for schools like Notre Dame, BC, something with a ‘Washington’ in it, etc.

Having the opportunity to call a number 1-6 and roll the die one time for a large firm job, and then roll it 3 more times for some other reasonable form of employment, is better than scrambling from minimum wage to $10 per hour, and then maybe finding a decent job, only then to live under fear of that job being eliminated, the chances of which are perhaps equal to the odds of PAYE being completely scrapped. Especially when the two other numbers represent better situations than the one in which you presently find yourself.

IBR/PAYE: a good idea that incentivizes bad decisions

[sinfiery]

sinfiery, how do you factor in the likelihood that you will be laid off at some point early in your career at a firm? Or simply being unemployed or underemployed between law jobs as a result of being laid off?

Laid off was accounted for at a firm. 4 year stint was assumed.


As for the rest, compare it to whatever job you currently have. That's the crux of the decision. Life ain't perfect. Law is far from a perfect solution to one's career goals, but there are some other shitty ass jobs out there. Most job prospects share this situation.

[spleenworship]

UNM SOL at in state rates, simply because it's the equivalent of having a 60% tuition scholly almost anywhere else.

Private/OOS: Northwestern

[ajax]

When I was a 1L on TLS I answered this exact same thread with Fordham. As a 3L my answer has changed to Vanderbilt.

I tried very hard in July to convince myself that Fordham at sticker made sense. I failed to do so. Now I am working yet another year, retaking, and hoping for t14.

[romothesavior]

LOL kapital's gon' kapital

The guy's head is so far up his own ass that it comes back out his mouth, where he then spews out shit that came from his own ass.

Like a one-man human centipede, it is bullshittery of a type and magnitude that defies nature, physics, anatomy, logic, etc.

[hume85]

LOL kapital's gon' kapital

The guy's head is so far up his own ass that it comes back out his mouth, where he then spews out shit that came from his own ass.

Like a one-man human centipede, it is bullshittery of a type and magnitude that defies nature, physics, anatomy, logic, etc.

In other words the average TLS poaster.

[kapital98]

LOL kapital's gon' kapital

Romo, you are one of the worst sources of advice on TLS. I've said it before, and i'll say it again, you are the epitome of TLS conventional wisdom.

The good news is that posters like you have been on the decline since I started viewing this site (early 2010).

[rad lulz]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

[kapital98]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

You're derailing this thread, but, that's a perfect example of me explaining economics and you saying "NO-NO-NO-NO". It's also a very good example of how TLS has changed (the absolute 'doom-and-gloom' crowd has become smaller).

[hume85]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

You're derailing this thread, but, that's a perfect example of me explaining economics and you saying "NO-NO-NO-NO". It's also a very good example of how TLS has changed (the absolute 'doom-and-gloom' crowd has become smaller).

Look, whatever analysis you were using doesn't matter: you were telling someone with a 2.82 GPA and a 155 LSAT to go to law school. This might be okay advice with a full tuition scholarship+fess, but what TTTT would give someone like that a full tuition scholarship?

ETA: I do agree that the non monetary value of being a lawyer should be included in any cost benefit analysis.

[rad lulz]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

You're derailing this thread, but, that's a perfect example of me explaining economics and you saying "NO-NO-NO-NO". It's also a very good example of how TLS has changed (the absolute 'doom-and-gloom' crowd has become smaller).

It hasn't become smaller, there are just fewer people poasting "Should I go to Nova Southeastern or Barry Law" threads.

[bk1]

ETA: I do agree that the non monetary value of being a lawyer should be included in any cost benefit analysis.

Maybe. I'm not sure we can even come close to accurately quantifying it.

[romothesavior]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

You're derailing this thread, but, that's a perfect example of me explaining economics and you saying "NO-NO-NO-NO". It's also a very good example of how TLS has changed (the absolute 'doom-and-gloom' crowd has become smaller).

No, we haven't become smaller, there are just fewer tards like you. Law school applicants have wised up, not by listening to your economololics analyses but by listening to profs, students, practitioners, and the unending stream of cautionary tales from the mainstream media, you goddamn twit.

ETA: I do agree that the non monetary value of being a lawyer should be included in any cost benefit analysis.

I agree with this. But at what cost, is the question. I want to be a lawyer and call myself a member of this "distinguished profession" but not for ramen noodles and the poorhouse. And like professor Campos pointed out on the last page, getting a JD doesn't make one a lawyer. I can't think of anything more humiliating than never practicing law after getting a JD, which is what about half of all grads face nowadays. Put that in your equation and smoke it, kap.

[romothesavior]

For some of kapital's quality jargon analysis see this thread.

You're derailing this thread, but, that's a perfect example of me explaining economics and you saying "NO-NO-NO-NO". It's also a very good example of how TLS has changed (the absolute 'doom-and-gloom' crowd has become smaller).

It hasn't become smaller, there are just fewer people poasting "Should I go to Nova Southeastern or Barry Law" threads.

Word.