Aqualibrium wrote: birD wrote:
I would never pick a T3 with a full scholarship over a T30 at sticker.
Even if you already have a family job lined up? Why? Just curious to hear your perspective...
Just do what you do man/woman. I wouldn't go to a t30 at sticker unless that meant a total debt of less than six figures. 160k at a t30 is idiotic. You don't need our validation here. You've got a pretty good option with the ability to go to school in what is presumably an area you are form/enjoy, and some prospect of a job after graduation. You're mind probably isn't changing, and it definitely shouldn't change on advice that includes "go to a t30 at sticker."
My advice was not "go to T30 at sticker." Rather I stated I would personally go to a T30 at sticker than attend a T3 with a full scholarship. Attending law school has an opportunity cost. We lost 3 years of income and pay for our housing/etc. The cost of attending a T3 is not free. Simply put, there are costs with attending any law school.
In an optimal world the person with a T30 admit would have a scholarship to a lower T1 or T2 school. Either of the aforesaid with a scholarship might make more sense than attending a T30 school. If the op has family obligations, family connections, or any other unique circumstances, he might be better served by going to the T3. However, as a general rule of thumb going 50-60k in debt and giving up 3 years of income for a T3 education is not all that great a deal compared to going 150-160k in debt and giving up 3 years of income in a T30. Neither is an ideal situation, but we all have to pick our poison or find something more palatable (ex. partial scholarship to low t1 or t2)