Take the money and Run; YS - CCNH? Forum

[3L2014]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

[NYSprague]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

The argument that you should borrow $300,000 because you can't figure out other things to do with your life might be stronger if law was a stable career. Many assumptions about law are inherent in this argument, starting with getting biglaw. I don't believe that there are no other jobs or careers out there for 0Ls, but none of them offer a $160,000 starting salary. Be honest, if you knew you would be getting $50,000 or less starting from law school, it would lose the attraction. The money is why most people go to law school instead of finding other opportunities.

You guys are going to do what you want anyway. I wonder how many people are planning it will be ok because they can use PAYE if necessary. If your backup is that you never have to pay the total back, then maybe it does change the calculus.

Remember that the people posting in this thread who are warning against sticker have biglaw jobs. The people who don't have biglaw haven't commented. Just check the bimodal salary distribution for a bigger reality check.

[cotiger]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

The kinds of splitters who get into YHS are the kinds of splitters who get money elsewhere. Here's a list of every non-URM acceptance to YHS w/ below 3.6 GPA who list their scholarships:

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/mnindc (full-ride+stipend at Chicago)
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/La%20Cienega ($100k at NYU)
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/winstonsalem (full-ride at Columbia)
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/MyNameIsNeo ($75k at Michigan)
http://lawschoolnumbers.com/The_Specs ($120k at Michigan, $50k at NYU)

I'm sure that the scenario you describe happens, but it's rare enough to be able to discount it when talking broad strokes.

I wouldn't get $300k into debt for Cornell ever.

[3L2014]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

The argument that you should borrow $300,000 because you can't figure out other things to do with your life might be stronger if law was a stable career. Many assumptions about law are inherent in this argument, starting with getting biglaw. I don't believe that there are no other jobs or careers out there for 0Ls, but none of them offer a $160,000 starting salary. Be honest, if you knew you would be getting $50,000 or less starting from law school, it would lose the attraction. The money is why most people go to law school instead of finding other opportunities.

You guys are going to do what you want anyway. I wonder how many people are planning it will be ok because they can use PAYE if necessary. If your backup is that you never have to pay the total back, then maybe it does change the calculus.

Remember that the people posting in this thread who are warning against sticker have biglaw jobs. The people who don't have biglaw haven't commented. Just check the bimodal salary distribution for a bigger reality check.

Im not a 0L...

Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it. To take an attitude that is 100% risk-averse is not necessarily correct. If you are a 0L looking at an opportunity cost of a salary that will pay 30-50k your entire life then the calculus for going to the T13 at sticker makes sense. The biglaw people saying not to pay sticker are those that had scholarship at other schools in the T13. Yeah, I wouldnt pay sticker to go to Harvard if I could go to Duke with a 90k scholarship, but that is not everyone's choice.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

[jk148706]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

There are fields with much lower starting salaries than 30-50k

[BruceWayne]

Im not a 0L...Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it. To take an attitude that is 100% risk-averse is not necessarily correct. If you are a 0L looking at an opportunity cost of a salary that will pay 30-50k your entire life then the calculus for going to the T13 at sticker makes sense. The biglaw people saying not to pay sticker are those that had scholarship at other schools in the T13. Yeah, I wouldnt pay sticker to go to Harvard if I could go to Duke with a 90k scholarship, but that is not everyone's choice.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[3L2014]

Im not a 0L...Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it. To take an attitude that is 100% risk-averse is not necessarily correct. If you are a 0L looking at an opportunity cost of a salary that will pay 30-50k your entire life then the calculus for going to the T13 at sticker makes sense. The biglaw people saying not to pay sticker are those that had scholarship at other schools in the T13. Yeah, I wouldnt pay sticker to go to Harvard if I could go to Duke with a 90k scholarship, but that is not everyone's choice.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LST:
Cornell: large firm score of 57.5% + fed clerkship rate of 10.9% = 68.4%
So do get to 70%, we only need to assume that a handful of students could have gotten biglaw but wanted to do a SSC clerkship or government or PI

[A. Nony Mouse]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

There are fields with much lower starting salaries than 30-50k

They're not actually fields, they're take what you can get jobs that don't require any particular field. Even then, as boomerish as it sounds, people can develop skills, change jobs, and make a career over the course of 10 years. It's just that these career paths aren't nicely and tidily laid out the way undergrad --> law school --> law is.

I mean, I'm not saying don't go to law school if that's what you actually want to do. I just think a lot of people go to law school because they don't know what else to do with themselves, because other career paths aren't clearly laid out, and are more like "fuck around in crap jobs for a while to find out what I can do, get skills, get to know people, and eventually get somewhere."

I'm also not saying it's necessarily easy to create that other career, but honestly, most people with the abilities to get into a top law school will have the abilities to forge some other kind of career. They just don't want to because they don't know what it is.

(Again, trying not to sound too BOOTSTRAPS here. I just mean that plenty of humanities etc. majors don't go to law school and don't starve in the streets or bag groceries forever. Even if they bag groceries for a while.)

[jk148706]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

There are fields with much lower starting salaries than 30-50k

They're not actually fields, they're take what you can get jobs that don't require any particular field.

That's not necessarily true. I was a journalism major, and reporters make peanuts. I had many friends making <$20k out of school. Most were in the 20-25k range, with a few who landed great jobs at a big city newspaper or tv station.

And as a reporter, you have to pay your dues big time. Go to a small town middle of nowhere make no money for three years -> go to a medium sizes town make no money for five years -> maybe get to a big city making OK money.

I mean, yeah, you can eventually make a career of it, but the hours suck, the pay sucks and you have to keep moving if you want to advance. So, law school -> big law doesn't sound so bad.

[francesfarmer]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

There are fields with much lower starting salaries than 30-50k

They're not actually fields, they're take what you can get jobs that don't require any particular field.

That's not necessarily true. I was a journalism major, and reporters make peanuts. I had many friends making >$20k out of school. Most were in the 20-25k range, with a few who landed great jobs at a big city newspaper or tv station.

And as a reporter, you have to pay your dues big time. Go to a small town middle of nowhere make no money for three years -> go to a medium sizes town make no money for five years -> maybe get to a big city making OK money.

I mean, yeah, you can eventually make a career of it, but the hours suck, the pay sucks and you have to keep moving if you want to advance. So, law school -> big law doesn't sound so bad.

Another example: social work.

[TheSpanishMain]

Im not a 0L...Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it. To take an attitude that is 100% risk-averse is not necessarily correct. If you are a 0L looking at an opportunity cost of a salary that will pay 30-50k your entire life then the calculus for going to the T13 at sticker makes sense. The biglaw people saying not to pay sticker are those that had scholarship at other schools in the T13. Yeah, I wouldnt pay sticker to go to Harvard if I could go to Duke with a 90k scholarship, but that is not everyone's choice.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LST:
Cornell: large firm score of 57.5% + fed clerkship rate of 10.9% = 68.4%
So do get to 70%, we only need to assume that a handful of students could have gotten biglaw but wanted to do a SSC clerkship or government or PI

Duke isn't quite that high, but I get your basic point. Out of the T14 (Georgetown is iffy, although it's debatable how much of their Big Law placement is influenced by people opting for government) you have a pretty good chance of getting Big Law if you want it. It might not be the most preftigious firm of all time, and your opportunities might be limited to NYC, but as long as you don't have shit grades and are not a sperglord you SHOULD be okay.

I still don't think this is justification for going to Cornell, Penn, or Duke at sticker, though. It assumes you'll be able to hang on to your Big Law job for a long time, making crippling payments and (likely) paying NYC rent. Your big prize is getting to live like you make 50k in NYC for years. Hooray.

[buffalo_]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

The argument that you should borrow $300,000 because you can't figure out other things to do with your life might be stronger if law was a stable career. Many assumptions about law are inherent in this argument, starting with getting biglaw. I don't believe that there are no other jobs or careers out there for 0Ls, but none of them offer a $160,000 starting salary. Be honest, if you knew you would be getting $50,000 or less starting from law school, it would lose the attraction. The money is why most people go to law school instead of finding other opportunities.

You guys are going to do what you want anyway. I wonder how many people are planning it will be ok because they can use PAYE if necessary. If your backup is that you never have to pay the total back, then maybe it does change the calculus.

Remember that the people posting in this thread who are warning against sticker have biglaw jobs. The people who don't have biglaw haven't commented. Just check the bimodal salary distribution for a bigger reality check.

So sticker + shitlaw = TCR?

[09042014]

The cream rises to the top. Even if you work at the GAP, after 10 year you'll be running a GAP yourself.

[jk148706]

The cream rises to the top. Even if you work at the GAP, after 10 year you'll be running a GAP yourself.

But who wants to work ten years at a GAP

[NYSprague]

Paying sticker is not necessarily dumb. People on this forum tend to over-generalize and to hindsight rationalize their decisions/law school choice.

There are many times when paying sticker is probably worth it.

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into HYS, but because of a combo of softs/splitter scores, you dont receive a substantial scholarship to any of the T13

If your opportunity cost is really low, and you get into Cornell, none of the rest of the T13, and want to work in NY & only have ties to NY

The argument that you should borrow $300,000 because you can't figure out other things to do with your life might be stronger if law was a stable career. Many assumptions about law are inherent in this argument, starting with getting biglaw. I don't believe that there are no other jobs or careers out there for 0Ls, but none of them offer a $160,000 starting salary. Be honest, if you knew you would be getting $50,000 or less starting from law school, it would lose the attraction. The money is why most people go to law school instead of finding other opportunities.

You guys are going to do what you want anyway. I wonder how many people are planning it will be ok because they can use PAYE if necessary. If your backup is that you never have to pay the total back, then maybe it does change the calculus.

Remember that the people posting in this thread who are warning against sticker have biglaw jobs. The people who don't have biglaw haven't commented. Just check the bimodal salary distribution for a bigger reality check.

So sticker + shitlaw = TCR?

The even funnier part is that everyone is on PAYE.

[09042014]

The cream rises to the top. Even if you work at the GAP, after 10 year you'll be running a GAP yourself.

But who wants to work ten years at a GAP

(objectively better QOL than almost all lawyers)

[3L2014]

Even people with humanities degrees are bit looking at jobs that pay $30-50k for life. It is possible to find good employment with a humanities degree. You may start out earning $30-50k and you may even be in them for a number of years, but to say that's all you'll earn on perpetuity is really short-sighted.

There are fields with much lower starting salaries than 30-50k

They're not actually fields, they're take what you can get jobs that don't require any particular field.

That's not necessarily true. I was a journalism major, and reporters make peanuts. I had many friends making <$20k out of school. Most were in the 20-25k range, with a few who landed great jobs at a big city newspaper or tv station.

And as a reporter, you have to pay your dues big time. Go to a small town middle of nowhere make no money for three years -> go to a medium sizes town make no money for five years -> maybe get to a big city making OK money.

I mean, yeah, you can eventually make a career of it, but the hours suck, the pay sucks and you have to keep moving if you want to advance. So, law school -> big law doesn't sound so bad.

Yeah, I was being very generous with the assumptions, but 300k in debt for much higher earnings over the course of a lifetime is not necessarily a bad call DEPENDING ON OTHER OPTIONS.

people in law often overlook how shitty the job market is elsewhere. You graduate with a 3.5 from StateU and dont have a marketable major, well, things arent great.

Yes, take the scholarship money within the T13, yes take the scholarship money to a strong regional in a region you want to work, but if those are not options, then sticker is defensible at the T13

[EquallyWrong]

The cream rises to the top. Even if you work at the GAP, after 10 year you'll be running a GAP yourself.

But who wants to work ten years at a GAP

It might be the better option in terms of quality of work life (even in terms of short term finances, long term finances, and personal fulfillment), but a modern woman of sophistication is unlikely to be impressed by it...

[rayiner]

Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it.

I bet the number is more like 80%. That said, if anybody takes anything out of the posts practicing attorneys have made in these threads, it's this: that's not the only risk that matters. It's 20% chance of striking out AND non-zero chance of getting no-offered or Lathamed AND non-zero chance of getting big law and hating it so much you quit within a year AND 50% chance of burning out within 3 years AND non-zero chance of not landing a good in-house or government gig after leaving big law, etc.

I think big law odds throughout the T14 are better than people assume. However, I think there is a tendency on TLS to think that once you get big law, you're golden. That's wrong. From a T14, getting big law is the easy part. Putting up with it long enough to pay down loans and exit into a career you enjoy is the real battle.

[A. Nony Mouse]

Yeah, let me retract a little: first, I was responding specifically to the idea that you would make "$30-50K your entire life." That's just an extremely short-sighted vision of a career and how things can change over the course of probably 40 years - I don't care what you majored in. That's not a good reason to go to law school because it's not a really realistic assessment of career prospects (for the time you'd be in law school? sure. Your whole life? no).

I also don't mean there's necessarily anything wrong with going to law school because the career path is clearly laid out, just that that's not the same thing as going because otherwise you'll make $30-50K your whole life, and when someone says the latter, I think a lot of times they mean the former.

As for the fields that require you to pay your dues like journalism and social work - well, if you decide you don't want to do that, that's fine. It's just not really what I was originally responding to (I sucked myself into extending my argument a little far). And maybe the opportunity cost is low in terms of salary, but higher in terms of experience and paying the dues you refer to - when people talk about low opportunity cost in going to law school, the implication is that the 3 years you'd spend going to school wouldn't advance you in any way. Three years of crap salary isn't an issue, three years of experience paying the dues that get you further in another profession might be.

(And of course if you decide it's not worth it, that's fine too. It's just when people talk about going to law school because of the "low opportunity cost" they seem to imply that they'd be doing absolutely nothing else worth while. Changing fields from something like journalism or social work is a perfectly reasonable choice, but it doesn't seem to me the same as saying "low opportunity cost.")

[UVAIce]

Im not a 0L...Yeah, the 160k salary is not guaranteed, but at schools like Cornell/Duke/Penn they are essentially 70% if you want it. To take an attitude that is 100% risk-averse is not necessarily correct. If you are a 0L looking at an opportunity cost of a salary that will pay 30-50k your entire life then the calculus for going to the T13 at sticker makes sense. The biglaw people saying not to pay sticker are those that had scholarship at other schools in the T13. Yeah, I wouldnt pay sticker to go to Harvard if I could go to Duke with a 90k scholarship, but that is not everyone's choice.

LMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This!

You also have to realize that risk in the education context as a whole is much different then say the risk you take on in securities markets, etc. For one, you can't really "diversify" your education investment or hedge your JD risk the same way you can with investments. Also, very few stocks are of the nature that you either get a 10 bagger or your stock is worth nothing.

I also like to think that at this time and juncture we all understand the reality of non-dis-chargeable student loans. I can't just windup my JD or declare bankruptcy and go on to fight another day. I can't just let the bank foreclose on my JD. I think we all get the point.

The only way that law students really have to hedge against the risk of a JD - other than just not going to law school - is by borrowing less. The only route that most JD students have to do this is by taking scholarship money, and that often means getting a degree from a less "prestigious" university.

[Saddle Up]

Simple enough. There are those who wouldn’t accept a free ride to a TT while others are paying $ticker for the privilege to attend.

To simplify it even further. Someone with a 170/4.0 could likely ride free at over half the law schools but won’t.

Yeah, well, some people are stupid and shouldn't be lawyers. If someone's numbers are such that even a TTT won't give them money, then they probably fall into that camp.

I tend to think that sticker anywhere is dumb, but there's no question it's much dumber at a TTT than at a good school.

+1. I passed up T6 and opted for a highly ranked Tier 1 offering a substantial discount. Anecdotally, I believe more people are opting for less debt by selecting a school providing a solid chance for a good employment outcome. For most, if you go to the best school you can, chances are you will be paying near sticker

[KatyMarie]

The cream rises to the top. Even if you work at the GAP, after 10 year you'll be running a GAP yourself.

But who wants to work ten years at a GAP

It might be the better option in terms of quality of work life (even in terms of short term finances, long term finances, and personal fulfillment), but a modern woman of sophistication is unlikely to be impressed by it...

Yeah, the point is probably exaggerated...but when I think about it, my friends who didn't go the college route are generally pretty happy working/raising kids with a retail/food service/whatever 20/25k job. On a day to day basis anyway, they seem a whole lot happier than a lot of the people on this site!

I do think that people can get too caught up in in all the societal pressure to go to college (or grad school when you've got a useless undergrad degree), but if you can stay employed around 40h a week/out of debt, doing something you don't mind, your quality of life can be pretty good.

[3L2014]

You also have to realize that risk in the education context as a whole is much different then say the risk you take on in securities markets, etc. For one, you can't really "diversify" your education investment or hedge your JD risk the same way you can with investments. Also, very few stocks are of the nature that you either get a 10 bagger or your stock is worth nothing.

I also like to think that at this time and juncture we all understand the reality of non-dis-chargeable student loans. I can't just windup my JD or declare bankruptcy and go on to fight another day. I can't just let the bank foreclose on my JD. I think we all get the point.

The only way that law students really have to hedge against the risk of a JD - other than just not going to law school - is by borrowing less. The only route that most JD students have to do this is by taking scholarship money, and that often means getting a degree from a less "prestigious" university.

Yes, paying sticker is risky, but it doesnt mean that the EV calculation wouldnt point to going to the T13. If you want to life your life with a risk-neutral preference toward risk, that is totally defensible in certain situations.

And yes, once you get biglaw at OCI you're not golden, but for those who do get Latham'd some will find other firms/clerkships (feeling like professors at the T13 would bend over backwards to help a qualified candidate who got screwed by circumstance)