Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

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

Which school should I go to?

Stanford University
18
38%
Harvard University
2
4%
University of Chicago
28
58%
 
Total votes: 48

kissmyankles

New
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:37 pm

Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby kissmyankles » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:18 pm

About Me:

I live in Cambridge. I'd prefer to live in Chicago or California. I'm originally from Michigan, my family lives in Michigan, and my long-term goal is to be governor of Michigan. Along the way, I plan to go into corporate law then transition into civil rights law mid-career do something more about giving back to the community. I get married next month. My SO has no preference on law school. Since my SO makes ~$110k alone, I don't think I will qualify for any loan forgiveness programs. My SO will pay all of my living expenses.

Cost of Attendance (Only considering tuition):
Harvard: Gave me $23k/year in grants. COA is ~$114k.
Stanford: Gave me $48k/year in grants. COA is $30k.
Chicago: Gave me the Rubenstein (full tuition + stipend). COA is NEGATIVE ~$45k.

P.S. Forgive me if including Harvard is ridiculous. I firmly believe prestige doesn't matter for the usual legal careers, but since I'm interested in politics, I think lay prestige is a little more relevant.

Edit: I see the comment about me delaying marriage is controversial, but I've talked to Stanford's financial aid and was told that students have done this in the past. I only have to report my SO's income if we are legally married or intend to legally marry (in particular, if we file a joint tax return or my SO claims me on their taxes). I also have to report any money given to me by my partner (or anyone for that matter) and I plan to do that. It's no different than if I were to decide to live with my aunt while at Stanford and have her pay my living expenses. Stanford wouldn't expect me to report her income.
Last edited by kissmyankles on Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:25 pm, edited 5 times in total.

LoganCouture

Gold
Posts: 1536
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby LoganCouture » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:20 pm

edit: nvm
Last edited by LoganCouture on Sat May 13, 2017 2:02 am, edited 3 times in total.

kissmyankles

New
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:37 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby kissmyankles » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:22 pm

LoganCouture wrote:When you get married next month you will have to report your spousal income to SLS. It will decrease that aid amount for this year (I'm guessing significantly). Talk to finaid now about how that will affect your grant.


If I do Stanford, my SO and I will still do the ceremony, but forgo the paperwork (so I don't have to report it) until I am a 2L 3L.
Last edited by kissmyankles on Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.

curry1

Silver
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri May 15, 2015 11:41 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby curry1 » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:23 pm

kissmyankles wrote:About Me:

I live in Cambridge. I'd prefer to live in Chicago or California. I'm originally from Michigan, my family lives in Michigan, and my long-term goal is to be governor of Michigan. Along the way, I plan to go into corporate law then transition into civil rights law mid-career. I get married next month. My SO has no preference on law school. Since my SO makes ~$110k alone, I don't think I will qualify for any loan forgiveness programs. My SO will pay all of my living expenses.

Cost of Attendance (Only considering tuition):
Harvard: Gave me $23k/year in grants. COA is ~$114k.
Stanford: Gave me $48k/year in grants. COA is $30k.
Chicago: Gave me the Rubenstein (full tuition + stipend). COA is NEGATIVE ~$45k.

P.S. Forgive me if including Harvard is ridiculous. I firmly believe prestige doesn't matter for the usual legal careers, but since I'm interested in politics, I think lay prestige is a little more relevant.


Stanford has plenty of lay/political prestige, if you are genuinely set on politics and have the background/connections to make it happen that would be defensible over UChicago. H is certainly not worth it.

User avatar
existentialcrisis

Bronze
Posts: 495
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2016 11:23 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby existentialcrisis » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:23 pm

kissmyankles wrote:About Me:

I live in Cambridge. I'd prefer to live in Chicago or California. I'm originally from Michigan, my family lives in Michigan, and my long-term goal is to be governor of Michigan. Along the way, I plan to go into corporate law then transition into civil rights law mid-career. I get married next month. My SO has no preference on law school. Since my SO makes ~$110k alone, I don't think I will qualify for any loan forgiveness programs. My SO will pay all of my living expenses.

Cost of Attendance (Only considering tuition):
Harvard: Gave me $23k/year in grants. COA is ~$114k.
Stanford: Gave me $48k/year in grants. COA is $30k.
Chicago: Gave me the Rubenstein (full tuition + stipend). COA is NEGATIVE ~$45k.

P.S. Forgive me if including Harvard is ridiculous. I firmly believe prestige doesn't matter for the usual legal careers, but since I'm interested in politics, I think lay prestige is a little more relevant.


This is not really a viable option. Setting aside how competitive civil rights PI positions are and how they would view a prior career in private practice, you would learn literally nothing practicing corporate law that would be at all applicable to civil rights work.

LoganCouture

Gold
Posts: 1536
Joined: Tue Feb 11, 2014 9:48 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby LoganCouture » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:25 pm

.
Last edited by LoganCouture on Sat May 13, 2017 2:02 am, edited 1 time in total.

grixxlybear99

Bronze
Posts: 131
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2015 1:26 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby grixxlybear99 » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:34 pm

I don't know how, unless you come from a politically connected family, you intend to become governor of Michigan if you don't a stronger connection to the state. Why not go to UMichigan for free + stipend? Get a job in govt/public interest in Michigan or maybe DC-prestige chase. I don't see how Stanford law -> corporate law -> (???) civil rights law = governor of Michigan.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16640
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Rigo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:35 pm

kissmyankles wrote:
LoganCouture wrote:When you get married next month you will have to report your spousal income to SLS. It will decrease that aid amount for this year (I'm guessing significantly). Talk to finaid now about how that will affect your grant.

If I do Stanford, my SO and I will still do the ceremony, but forgo the paperwork (so I don't have to report it) until I am a 2L 3L.

Very smart.
ETA: ethically kinda fukt up, but crafty nonetheless.
Last edited by Rigo on Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Npret » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:36 pm

kissmyankles wrote:
LoganCouture wrote:When you get married next month you will have to report your spousal income to SLS. It will decrease that aid amount for this year (I'm guessing significantly). Talk to finaid now about how that will affect your grant.


If I do Stanford, my SO and I will still do the ceremony, but forgo the paperwork (so I don't have to report it) until I am a 2L 3L.

Great training for a political career! Why not take more need based aid than you actually qualify for? Good thinking OP!

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16640
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Rigo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:42 pm

Corporate law to civil rights law? What?
I'd take the Ruby. Use the savings for the wedding or a down payment on a Michgan house in 3-5 years. Stanford is justifiable too though at that price point.
Your reasons for wanting Harvard are ridiculous and not worth that amount of money. If anything, the deplorables will hold a hoity toity coastal elite degree against you so Harvard could just as well be a curse.

Julius

New
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:02 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Julius » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:48 pm

So the choice is between paying more for Stanford while you basically scam future need-based students out of need-based funding or coming out cash positive via the Rubenstein.

As an SLS alum, I vote Chicago.
Last edited by Julius on Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Npret » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:49 pm

Just FYI:
4. Spouse’s Contribution
If the student is married, or plans to marry during the school year, the earnings of the spouse or spouse-to-be are expected to be available to help meet Law School and living expenses. There are two exceptions: if the spouse is a full-time student, or if the spouse does not work outside the home and the family has a dependent pre-school age child.
In calculating the spouse’s contribution from summer income, any earnings over $6,000 will require 57% of the amount over $6,000. In calculating the nine-month spousal contribution, the Law School assumes that the earnings of a spouse are at least $6,000. This amount is imputed as a resource whether or not it is actually earned. If a spouse earns over $6,000 during the year, his or her contribution towards the couple’s expenses will be the after-tax earnings less a $15,507 living allowance.
If a student initially provides only estimates of the spouse’s income, the actual amount must be provided once the spouse’s employment has been finalized.

Note: "or plans to marry"

https://www-cdn.law.stanford.edu/wp-con ... ndbook.pdf

I vote for not scamming your law school but you do you OP. We all know it's at least 75% you will go to Harvard anyway.

Hikikomorist

Platinum
Posts: 7791
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 12:05 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Hikikomorist » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:52 pm

:roll: OP, solve your problem by putting on hold plans to get married until after your 3L year.

ETA: Still voted for you to take the Ruby.
Last edited by Hikikomorist on Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16640
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Rigo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:53 pm

I would flat out refuse to vote for someone who picked Harvard here. Shows horrible judgement.
If there is a future Michigan politician who went to Harvard 2017-2020, I'll know it's you OP.

User avatar
presidentspivey

Bronze
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:34 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby presidentspivey » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:53 pm

While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

Rigo

Diamond
Posts: 16640
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Rigo » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:55 pm

presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

Ah yes. We must not forget the people who put off becoming white for three years to receive a financial benefit.

Julius

New
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 2:02 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Julius » Sun Apr 09, 2017 3:56 pm

presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.


Read the terms and conditions of need-based funding at Stanford. OP's plan is clearly contrary to the agreement.

Also, OP is probably a flame.
Last edited by Julius on Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hikikomorist

Platinum
Posts: 7791
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2014 12:05 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Hikikomorist » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:00 pm

Julius wrote:
presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.


Read the terms and conditions of need-based funding at Stanford. OP's plan is clearly contrary to the agreement.

Unclear whether marriage means the ceremony or the formal paperwork. Either way, OP just has to shift to internally not planning anything until after 3L. I'm not seeing the problem here.

User avatar
presidentspivey

Bronze
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:34 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby presidentspivey » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:04 pm

Rigo wrote:
presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

Ah yes. We must not forget the people who put off becoming white for three years to receive a financial benefit.


Clumsy phrasing on my part, but my point holds. We all know about the people who are 1/8 Mexican but receive the URM boost. It's not terribly different from what's going on here. Do what you have to do OP. "Plans to marry" is a nebulous term.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Npret » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:05 pm

presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

OP deliberately plans to not report household income in order to receive more need based aid than the amount to which they would otherwise be entitled. Call it what you want.

Not sure why you are bringing up URM but I'm fairly sure that's not allowed/appropriate/ take it to another thread/ whatever Nony usually says here.

Npret

Gold
Posts: 1545
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2017 11:42 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Npret » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:08 pm

presidentspivey wrote:
Rigo wrote:
presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

Ah yes. We must not forget the people who put off becoming white for three years to receive a financial benefit.


Clumsy phrasing on my part, but my point holds. We all know about the people who are 1/8 Mexican but receive the URM boost. It's not terribly different from what's going on here. Do what you have to do OP. "Plans to marry" is a nebulous term.

I don't think the Financial Aid office agrees with your view. Im going by what OP stated they planned to do which was get married but not submit the paperwork until the next year.

Whatever, OP should take Chicago but will end up at Harvard.

User avatar
presidentspivey

Bronze
Posts: 177
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2017 3:34 am

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby presidentspivey » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:09 pm

Npret wrote:
presidentspivey wrote:
Rigo wrote:
presidentspivey wrote:While I vote Ruby, I think some of the people in this thread are being overly dramatic when calling what OP would be doing at SLS a "scam". People do the same thing with URM all the time.

Ah yes. We must not forget the people who put off becoming white for three years to receive a financial benefit.


Clumsy phrasing on my part, but my point holds. We all know about the people who are 1/8 Mexican but receive the URM boost. It's not terribly different from what's going on here. Do what you have to do OP. "Plans to marry" is a nebulous term.

I don't think the Financial Aid office agrees with your view. Im going by what OP stated they planned to do which was get married but not submit the paperwork until the next year.

Whatever, OP should take Chicago but will end up at Harvard.


Agreed.

merde_happens

New
Posts: 64
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2014 4:49 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby merde_happens » Sun Apr 09, 2017 4:10 pm

Yeah I'd agree the Ruby is the best option here and I also second the posters who think your plans wrt income reporting for SLS need based aid is shady af and not something I'd want to see in a future politician.

As someone who grew up in Michigan and left for school, I think a Chicago degree will play best in Michigan. People see it as equally prestigious as Stanford/Harvard with the added benefit of it being midwestern and so you don't risk being seen as a coastal elite. Although if you didn't go to a Michigan school for undergrad people are probably going to be suspicious of your connections anyway.

But yeah I'm not sure how doing corporate law really fits into these goals.

User avatar
Po$eidon

Bronze
Posts: 274
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2015 2:03 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby Po$eidon » Sun Apr 09, 2017 5:03 pm

Just go to Harvard. It's the worst option of the 3 but OP clearly wants that prestige

User avatar
zhenders

Silver
Posts: 942
Joined: Tue Dec 17, 2013 10:21 pm

Re: Poll: Stanford ($$$) v. UChicago (Rubenstein/Ruby) v. Harvard ($)

Postby zhenders » Sun Apr 09, 2017 5:08 pm

Old adage that the more a person wants to be a politician the less they should be one: confirmed.

Thread snap shotted for "I told you so" street cred when this guy Blagojeviches in 15 years.



Return to “Choosing a Law School?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], nealric and 21 guests