Anonymous User wrote: Anonymous User wrote:
The only prestige that matters to me: My $200k-in-debt ass is going to be able to pay off my student loans with the MARKET SHATTERING BONUS and dat relatively-reasonable-COL that comes with being Kirkland-Chicago secure.
The only rankings that matter are the models & bottle (AKA "glorious, glorious $0 net worth) rankings:
Bartlit (why is everyone leaving them out?)/Keker/Susman tied for #3
Lol this is pretty dumb... If you actually cared about getting rid of debt as fast as possible, all things considered then:
ALL market Texas firms >>> K&E Chicago by a huge margin. Its not even close once taxes/ expenses/ and similar CoL costs are factored in, and this is coming from someone going to NY.
It's not so clear-cut. The tax differential isn't that big since Illinois has low state taxes. About $8k/year post-tax at $160k. Housing is a lot cheaper in Dallas or Houston than Chicago, but the need for a car really eats away at a lot of that. Sales tax is somewhat lower (8.25% in Houston versus 10% in Chicago) but not by dramatically much.
On the flip side, Texas firms (besides Susman), have very compressed salary scales. They start at $160k, but at e.g. Baker Botts, I don't think base exceeds $200k even for 7th/8th years. K&E Chicago meanwhile pays on the NY scale, which means 4th years are making $210k in base. Moreover, Texas firms historically did not match NYC bonus back when they were $30k+ for first years. While NYC firms aren't paying near that now, K&E is still paying 2-3x Cravath bonuses. And K&E makes you non-equity partner after 6th year, which comes with (reportedly large) profit-sharing bonuses.
Texas might still come out ahead, I'm not too familiar with the context of living, but you have to be aware that a mid-level at K&E Chicago is probably making $50k/year more than a mid-level at V&E Dallas.