65k a year makes law school worth it? Forum

[vanwinkle]

However, I am wildly entertained by the people who get on tls and shout that going to a t14 school or strong t1 school is the only economically sound decision. Really? Can any of you honestly say that going to say Northwestern at ~$172,000 (taken out in loans) is more financially sound that attending say DePaul for free?

Yes, because going to NU would create at least an option for getting reputable and high-paying work when you graduate, whereas going to DePaul would be a total waste of 3 years of your life.

The correct choices there are going to NU or not going to law school at all.

[TTTennis]

However, I am wildly entertained by the people who get on tls and shout that going to a t14 school or strong t1 school is the only economically sound decision. Really? Can any of you honestly say that going to say Northwestern at ~$172,000 (taken out in loans) is more financially sound that attending say DePaul for free?

Yes, because going to NU would create at least an option for getting reputable and high-paying work when you graduate, whereas going to DePaul would be a total waste of 3 years of your life.

The correct choices there are going to NU or not going to law school at all.

So, you're saying no one has ever come out of DePaul with a "reputable and high-paying" job? If the answer is no, then by default, going to DePaul does "create at least an option for getting reputable and high-paying work." Especially if you are going for free, because even if you only get one door opened that provides a job paying somewhat above the job you could've attained coming out of UG, then it was worth it.

BTW, I didn't even apply to DePaul so I couldn't care less what people think of DePaul haha.

[Veyron]

Again with the argument from the extremes

[rayiner]

I think this thread, and the NU Dean's study (although I have yet to see the methodology used to determine the break even point) is, for the most part, useless. There is no one salary that makes law school worthwhile and is universally applicable. There are too many variables to control for, especially considering the variability of each law school applicant's financial situation. How can you compare a person who enters law school with $40,000 in UG debt and will pay full price for their law school education (lets say $120,000) to someone who is entering the same law school with no UG debt and going on a full ride, and then say that $65,000 is the salary both need to make in order for law school to be a good investment. I understand this is a pre-law/law website and people on here love to argue, however relevant the arguments are, but this is the most pointless discussion ever.

However, I am wildly entertained by the people who get on tls and shout that going to a t14 school or strong t1 school is the only economically sound decision. Really? Can any of you honestly say that going to say Northwestern at ~$172,000 (taken out in loans) is more financially sound that attending say DePaul for free? Even if that NU grad comes out making $130,000 a year, the Depaul grad. made a worthwhile investment because he could be a manager at Target (maybe this opportunity wasn't available upon graduation from college, and this is a bad example I know) with his JD and not have to worry about debt. Now, this is where opportunity cost comes into play, but like I said earlier, each person's job opportunities, UG loan situation, COL, etc. straight out of undergrad vary so widely that trying to assign a break even point is meaningless.

One could make a formula though. Of course such a formula would only address financial break-evens, w/o considering subjective value. I nominate rayiner to make a formula/calculator.

[TTTennis]

Again with the argument from the extremes

haha! This time it's justified. He said NU "at least creates an option.." It doesn't matter if only ONE person (Yes, extreme) from DePaul gets a biglaw job, because that would mean DePaul "at least creates an option." Right? right! haha

[Aeroplane]

Is that your way of volunteering? Do it!

[Kobe_Teeth]

If I was 170,000 in debt, 65,000 would not be worth it.

However, if I was 65,000 in debt and started at $65,000 and was up near six-figures within 5yrs, I would be ok with that. Not thrilled, but ok with it.

[observationalist]

Comments like Dean Van Zandt's are why we've been trying to figure out a way to get all ABA-approved law schools to publish full employment lists showing where everyone goes. He's right about trying to figure out the median salary and has the right idea by trying to come up with a cutoff level. But even if schools got their salary reporting rates up to 100% (as opposed to, say, Santa Clara, which has a 44% reporting rate), it still doesn't go far enough. Prospectives need to have access to a lot more information about job prospects if they can ever hope of achieving some level of financial preparedness. Our thoughts are that if you had a spreadsheet listing (for every member of a class) salary, employer name, city, job title, whether JD is required, and whether bar passage is required, you'd be able to figure out both the value added by the law degree and the earning power for the median salary adjusted for cost of living.

Couple that with the sort of satisfaction surveys Michigan does, and law schools could actually start defending themselves from criticisms that they mislead prospectives for profiTTT.

[vanwinkle]

However, I am wildly entertained by the people who get on tls and shout that going to a t14 school or strong t1 school is the only economically sound decision. Really? Can any of you honestly say that going to say Northwestern at ~$172,000 (taken out in loans) is more financially sound that attending say DePaul for free?

Yes, because going to NU would create at least an option for getting reputable and high-paying work when you graduate, whereas going to DePaul would be a total waste of 3 years of your life.

The correct choices there are going to NU or not going to law school at all.

So, you're saying no one has ever come out of DePaul with a "reputable and high-paying" job? If the answer is no, then by default, going to DePaul does "create at least an option for getting reputable and high-paying work." Especially if you are going for free, because even if you only get one door opened that provides a job paying somewhat above the job you could've attained coming out of UG, then it was worth it.

BTW, I didn't even apply to DePaul so I couldn't care less what people think of DePaul haha.

People get jobs coming out of DePaul all the time. They're also friends with Mayor Daley or one of his buddies. But if you have those connections already, it doesn't matter where you go to law school, so DePaul works just fine.

Seriously, though, ITE you're not getting anything remotely resembling "prestigious" or "respectable" law work coming out of DePaul. It's like the eighth best school in the Chicago area and the country is saturated with laid-off lawyers right now. Going to DePaul is a terrible waste of 3 years because you could be earning SOME money in those 3 years at least and you're not getting a great return on the time you are spending there.