sinfiery wrote:True enough. This is a risk. Most things are. Undergrad was a very comparable risk to this.
Undergrad is less difficult and costs less, and there are far more jobs that require a bachelor's than require a JD. This makes the reward for UG much higher and the risk much lower.
You can't just say everything's a risk. It matters how much
risk for how much
reward. Otherwise you're just gambling, and at $200K to play, law school is one hell of a ridiculous gamble.
sinfiery wrote:The 5,000% was based on making partner at a BigLaw firm.
Right, the odds of which are ridiculously low from the 0L starting point.
sinfiery wrote:The 500% relies on the person with a T6 degree and Biglaw experience for 3-6 years earning more than 12.5% per year then the scholly + T100 graduate.
Okay, well, on the 0L front, even if you go to a T6 you can't assume you'll get BigLaw, and even those who have T6 and work BigLaw for a while will not keep making over $160K/yr. They will not necessarily make "500% more" over 40 years than those that didn't make BigLaw, because they'll ultimately end up in non-BigLaw jobs with salary bands that overlap what the folks who didn't make BigLaw are earning. If you do BigLaw for 5 years and then go be a public defender, you're making as much for the following 35 years as everyone who started out as a public defender is making.
sinfiery wrote:This is NOT a ridiculous assumption, in my ignorant opinion. Please tell me the pedigree is worth over 12.5% a year.
It's not, necessarily. It's worth it in terms of odds
, but not making more money in the same job. If you make BigLaw you'll make similar money as everyone else in BigLaw. If you leave BigLaw and go do gov't/PI work then you'll make the same as other people doing gov't/PI work. If you leave and go join a small practice then you'll make as much as anyone else in that practice. The pedigree may be good for helping you land those jobs, but it won't be good for helping you make more money than other people in those same jobs.
a ridiculous assumption to think going to a T6 will guarantee you long-term riches.
sinfiery wrote:Can we both agree that your LS education/experience will likely not become useless within 5 years?
Then we can agree the payout summary from the action will keep being useful past 5 years.
The costs stop after 5 years.
This is only true if you pay off everything within 5 years. And if you do, then yes, the costs stop then.
What you're missing is that there is no guarantee the income will keep flowing at higher and higher levels after 5 years. Hell, it's a mistake to assume that if you get BigLaw you'll be allowed to stay 5 years. Some people get pushed out faster or burn out faster. A lot of people can't take BigLaw hours forever; they start leaving around the 3-4 year mark and move to jobs that pay less but are survivable to them. If you haven't paid off all your debts by then, you're still going to have costs continuing for much longer because you're likely settling for a lower income in exchange for better quality of life, and lower income means less money to put toward your debts each year.
As a 0L, even going to T6, you can't assume you'll get BigLaw. Or that you'll stay in it for 5 years if you get it. Or that you'll get a job that will ever pay as much as BigLaw did after you leave. Because even among those who get BigLaw there are a significant number of people who end up not making that kind of money for long.