Latest employment data

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Moneytrees » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:25 pm

Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:32 pm

Moneytrees wrote:Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.


to truly not be middle class, 160k or not, you shouldn't have to strategize as to how to make a living, afford a decent home, and see your kid more than twice a week.

Moneytrees
Posts: 646
Joined: Tue Jan 14, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Moneytrees » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:40 pm

starry eyed wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.


to truly not be middle class, 160k or not, you shouldn't have to strategize as to how to make a living, afford a decent home, and see your kid more than twice a week.


Perhaps.

User avatar
UVAIce
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby UVAIce » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:49 pm

starry eyed wrote:"We collected a few of the most important ones. But first, let's define the "middle class." For the Council's purpose they went with households with incomes between 100 percent and 300 percent of the area median income. Here in New York that means income between $66,400 and $199,200." -from a google search

so much for 'objective'


When you're single and making $160K in NYC you are decidedly not middle-class. Interesting statistic, while 18% of households have an income in the six figure range only 5% of individuals have a six figure income. So starting off the bat you are well into the top 5% of individual wage earners. Another interesting statistic, the wealthiest neighborhood in NYC has a median wage of $105,000 for individuals. I will admit that most folks are not going to actually live the life of someone making $160K a year since they likely have significant student loans to repay.

User avatar
star fox
Posts: 13759
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby star fox » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:50 pm

Middle class is just a term of art that the vast majority of people identify. Rich means "richer than me" and poor means "poorer than me". Who cares.

User avatar
UVAIce
Posts: 442
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 3:10 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby UVAIce » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:51 pm

starry eyed wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.


to truly not be middle class, 160k or not, you shouldn't have to strategize as to how to make a living, afford a decent home, and see your kid more than twice a week.


You don't stay wealthy for long if you just throw your money around willy nilly. Most of the wealthy people I know are more persnickety about how they spend their money than anyone else I know.

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:14 pm

UVAIce wrote:
starry eyed wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.


to truly not be middle class, 160k or not, you shouldn't have to strategize as to how to make a living, afford a decent home, and see your kid more than twice a week.


You don't stay wealthy for long if you just throw your money around willy nilly. Most of the wealthy people I know are more persnickety about how they spend their money than anyone else I know.


yea but if you're in atlanta/austin/houston/other market paying low COL places, you are living in a mansion.

i used a COL comparison calculator to find the equivalent of 160k in NYC in my town- it was under 75k.
the equivalent of 160k in Austin is 375k in NYC.

http://money.cnn.com/calculator/pf/cost-of-living/

User avatar
moonman157
Posts: 1039
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 10:26 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby moonman157 » Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:40 pm

The people who live in expensive neighborhoods in NYC also don't have $250K in student loans

User avatar
Capitol_Idea
Posts: 10706
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 11:54 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Capitol_Idea » Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:43 pm

star fox wrote:Middle class is just a term of art that the vast majority of people identify. Rich means "richer than me" and poor means "poorer than me". Who cares.

If you don't go into law for the socio-economic status dick measuring contests, what DO you do it for?

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:45 pm

zacharus85 wrote:
star fox wrote:Middle class is just a term of art that the vast majority of people identify. Rich means "richer than me" and poor means "poorer than me". Who cares.

If you don't go into law for the socio-economic status dick measuring contests, what DO you do it for?


everything in life is for the socio-economic dick measuring contest (ie. to feel important); we just try to get there doing what we like and what we are good at
Last edited by starry eyed on Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

toothbrush
Posts: 2388
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2012 2:21 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby toothbrush » Sat Apr 11, 2015 11:46 pm

read this yesterday, thought it was interesting. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/11/busin ... ecure.html

talking about how middle class used to be defined in part by home ownership. and as real estate has boomed not in line with salaries, psychologically it doesnt feel like you are middle class w/out home ownership. and obviously, homes are exceedingly difficult to buy in nyc and even in many burbs.

User avatar
WeeBey
Posts: 535
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 8:23 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby WeeBey » Sun Apr 12, 2015 12:36 am

This thread really shows how privileged the folks on TLS are. 160k is not middle class in any as a combined household income, let alone for a single person.

Youre not middle class if:

Youre parents can afford to pay for law school or even a portion of it
If they paid for youre undergrad
If they bought you a car
If you can afford to buy or lease a car values over 50k

I consider myself middle class but we have a household income of like 40k.

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15503
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Tiago Splitter » Sun Apr 12, 2015 12:44 am

starry eyed wrote:
UVAIce wrote:
starry eyed wrote:
Moneytrees wrote:Living in Manhattan is so outrageously expensive that 160k might feel like a middle class income, even though it's objectively not.

Tere are ways to save on cost of living, though. Brooklyn or Queens are a short commute away from most firms in Manhattan and have apartments for a fraction of the price. You could also live in other parts of New York/Fairfield County, but the commute would probably start to weigh on you.


to truly not be middle class, 160k or not, you shouldn't have to strategize as to how to make a living, afford a decent home, and see your kid more than twice a week.


You don't stay wealthy for long if you just throw your money around willy nilly. Most of the wealthy people I know are more persnickety about how they spend their money than anyone else I know.


yea but if you're in atlanta/austin/houston/other market paying low COL places, you are living in a mansion.

i used a COL comparison calculator to find the equivalent of 160k in NYC in my town- it was under 75k.
the equivalent of 160k in Austin is 375k in NYC.

http://money.cnn.com/calculator/pf/cost-of-living/

If you just spend a couple minutes thinking you'll get why those COL calculators are so dumb.

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Sun Apr 12, 2015 12:54 am

its not science but the calculator gives an overview.

and accounting for the majority of the COL differences is real estate-which can be mitigated by not being dumb with your money (live like a pauper)

User avatar
DCfilterDC
Posts: 2665
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2014 11:55 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby DCfilterDC » Sun Apr 12, 2015 12:56 am

WeeBey wrote:This thread really shows how privileged the folks on TLS are. 160k is not middle class in any as a combined household income, let alone for a single person.

Youre not middle class if:

Youre parents can afford to pay for law school or even a portion of it
If they paid for youre undergrad
If they bought you a car
If you can afford to buy or lease a car values over 50k

I consider myself middle class but we have a household income of like 40k.


Who the hell in the middle class is buying a car more than 25k?

User avatar
Tiago Splitter
Posts: 15503
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 1:20 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Tiago Splitter » Sun Apr 12, 2015 12:57 am

starry eyed wrote:and accounting for the majority of the COL differences is real estate

Exactly. You spend an extra thousand bucks for a place. And get some of that back by having no car.

What's really stupid about it though is that no one lives in NYC like they do most other places. You can't just say "My 4 bedroom home costs me $2000 a month here in BFE. How much would that cost in Times Square?" It doesn't work that way. It then gets dumber when we equate living costs with salary. Earning 160k doesn't mean a 160k cost of living. Not even close.

User avatar
hoos89
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2012 11:09 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby hoos89 » Sun Apr 12, 2015 1:30 am

WeeBey wrote:This thread really shows how privileged the folks on TLS are. 160k is not middle class in any as a combined household income, let alone for a single person.

Youre not middle class if:

Youre parents can afford to pay for law school or even a portion of it
If they paid for youre undergrad
If they bought you a car
If you can afford to buy or lease a car values over 50k

I consider myself middle class but we have a household income of like 40k.


I don't think any of these are literally disqualifying. Median household income is $51k.

1. Anyone with income or savings can pay a portion of law school.
2. In-state tuition at some schools is ~$5k. It's really not that crazy to think that a family making $51k could pay that if they saved for it.
3. You can get a car for pretty cheap.
4. Also I'm no expert on leasing, but I'm pretty sure you can lease a car worth ~$50k for about $400-500/month. That's something that a middle class family could do, but they'd suffer in other areas (car poor).

User avatar
PeanutsNJam
Posts: 3699
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby PeanutsNJam » Sun Apr 12, 2015 2:48 am

All you people throwing around "middle class" need to correct for age too. I'd wager 160k is solidly in the 1% of 24-30 year old people.

User avatar
star fox
Posts: 13759
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2013 4:13 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby star fox » Sun Apr 12, 2015 3:15 am

Getting back to the transfer stuff as being relevant to an incoming 0L, I think it's a stretch to go too far down that sort of path since you could argue that applies to every single school (less so T14 but even there each school will lose some top students to HYS). Even if person who goes from TTTT to TT doesn't get big law it could effect lt/ft bar required placement generally so I think it's a dangerous game to play.

User avatar
PeanutsNJam
Posts: 3699
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 1:57 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby PeanutsNJam » Sun Apr 12, 2015 3:57 am

star fox wrote:Getting back to the transfer stuff as being relevant to an incoming 0L, I think it's a stretch to go too far down that sort of path since you could argue that applies to every single school (less so T14 but even there each school will lose some top students to HYS). Even if person who goes from TTTT to TT doesn't get big law it could effect lt/ft bar required placement generally so I think it's a dangerous game to play.


I think the general idea is raw bl+fc numbers shouldn't carry as much weight as people here assign it. There's too much variance, from the type of work "biglaw" is, to self selection, to transfers (which can account for up to a 5-10% difference). Not to mention not all "business" jobs are Starbucks baristas. It's a rough gauge of placement power, enough so you know Cornell > WUSTL, but when used as anything but a comparative tool it loses its value (and as demonstrated by HYS, it's not even a great comparative tool for peer-ish schools. Will people really say Cornell places better than NYU?). 30-40% bl+fc, which are "strong regional" numbers, does not necessarily mean median outcomes are dreadful, assuming no debt. If you have debt I guess all outcomes are dreadful.
Last edited by PeanutsNJam on Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Mack.Hambleton
Posts: 5417
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Mack.Hambleton » Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:05 am

BLFC is the easiest measurement of good placement from the ABA data and is very important imo, just slightly less in the T13 especially in HYS.

User avatar
JohannDeMann
Posts: 13831
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby JohannDeMann » Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:40 am

I mean it's alright - but the flaws are apparent. Look at what happened to Yale and Harvard. It's very flawed. Someone working for 102 person insurance defense shop doesn't have a better outcome than a boutique. Someone working for a bank in a jd advantage compliance position might have a better job than someon at a 125 person firm. Plenty of 125 person firms are shit-tier quality. Midlaw and boutiques and even state clerking could be better. Also, state courts still allow career clerks. Seems like a pretty sweet got to me to count 10 year forgiveness, 35 hour work week and a career that grows into six figures for cheap col areas. It's really arbitrary to say one of these positions are better than the other. I'm in biglaw and I'd choose biglaw close to last in almost all the other job categories.

User avatar
Mack.Hambleton
Posts: 5417
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2014 2:09 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Mack.Hambleton » Sun Apr 12, 2015 4:43 am

yes but basically there's no better data that's publicly available

User avatar
starry eyed
Posts: 2048
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:26 am

Re: Latest employment data

Postby starry eyed » Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:26 am

Mack.Hambleton wrote:yes but basically there's no better data that's publicly available


but it is ok to assume things at times... say you are comparing gtown and vandy... Gtown sends 20% of its class into gov't, vandy sends less thatn 10%. but for these purposes say they both send 45% to BLFC

we can safely assume that Gtown would be higher compared to vandy bc of it's location and bc its students self-selecting.

not a GULC apologist, i'm jut saying that two different schools can be possibly compared used subjective criteria..

Don't be like Robert McNamara and rely exclusively on numbers until it clouds your judgment.

User avatar
Rigo
Posts: 11948
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 3:19 pm

Re: Latest employment data

Postby Rigo » Sun Apr 12, 2015 9:31 am

Problem is that these assumptions can't be precisely quantified, so who knows how much the popular assumptions are overstated. Assumptions are just that--assumptions.




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: badhombre, Baidu [Spider] and 9 guests