UCB vs T70 full tuition
Posted: Fri Jun 07, 2013 7:34 am
.
T70? Circumstances? Are you from CA?
Big differences between Loyola and Oklahoma.
Law School Discussion Forums
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/
https://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=210772
http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=206299TLS wrote:[Please include]
-The schools you are considering
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
-Your general career goals
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers
-How many times you have taken the LSAT
OP, you still need to do this. Stop acting so squirrelly.Nova wrote:http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 1&t=206299TLS wrote:[Please include]
-The schools you are considering
-Where you are from and where you want to work, and other places where you have significant ties (if any)
-Your general career goals
-Your LSAT/GPA numbers
-How many times you have taken the LSAT
You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
In b4 "Not gunna!"sinfiery wrote:You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
You are seriously screwing yourself. If you got a 170 on the LSAT you would have full rides to multiple T-14s. Your approach is EXTREMELY short-sighted. How old are you?! Jesus christ.adad wrote:I know I am going to get this answer. Thanks. But no, staying home a year costs me a year of my life!sinfiery wrote:You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
adad wrote:I know I am going to get this answer. Thanks. But no, staying home a year costs me a year of my life!sinfiery wrote:You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
In b4 21NanaP wrote:adad wrote:I know I am going to get this answer. Thanks. But no, staying home a year costs me a year of my life!sinfiery wrote:You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
But a year of your life vs a lifetime of debt? I'd take a year off and retake, unless you're a much older candidate, but even then I wouldn't take on $200K debt. How old are you?
OP getting into Berkeley with a 162 most likely means they have a shot at HYS with a 170+bruin91 wrote:Not trying to troll, I promise. But if OP has a 162 and got into UC Berkeley off the waitlist, how effective will the retake option be? Applicants with 4.0 167 were rejected outright from Berkeley. Unless OP gets a 167 or so, substantial money at a peer school is unlikely, and the $ from getting an extra year's worth of salary will be more unless OP gets a 170, and has a shot at HYS.
90% of the sub-165 3.8+ GPA threads, I agree on the retake, but this isn't a slam dunk for retake in my mind. I think it depends on how much preparation OP put into the LSAT and where he/she was practicing.
*I'm expecting a full force reaction to this post*
This is my sincere guesswork. I'm happy to hear rebuttals.
Just STOP it with this hyperbolic bull shit. 200k is not a lifetime of debt at all. It's been shown in previous threads it's very possible to pay off with a biglaw or other job.NanaP wrote:adad wrote:I know I am going to get this answer. Thanks. But no, staying home a year costs me a year of my life!sinfiery wrote:You should retake the LSAT!adad wrote:Thank you for all input,
The numbers 200K in debt vs. 0 debt are adjusted with all the resources I have
My LSAT is 162 but graduated summa cum laude from a top private
I am single and don't mind working anywhere...
But a year of your life vs a lifetime of debt? I'd take a year off and retake, unless you're a much older candidate, but even then I wouldn't take on $200K debt. How old are you?
Sure I can. IMO, there is absolutely no way anyone should waste three years of their life at a T70, unless that T70 was paying them big bucks to attend.I have no idea why there are 6 votes already, there is absolutely no way one could advise the OP one way or the other
Of the 6 votes, three were for Cal and three were for USD (sorry, I mean the "T70")Big Dog wrote:Sure I can. IMO, there is absolutely no way anyone should waste three years of their life at a T70, unless that T70 was paying them big bucks to attend.I have no idea why there are 6 votes already, there is absolutely no way one could advise the OP one way or the other
sinfiery wrote:You should retake. Being young and unburdened by any major commitments such as law school debt will allow you to do almost anything. It can very likely be one of the most exciting years of your life plus the upside of a few full rides in the t14 with that GPA or HYS.
If you don't know what you want to do, I'd go to berk. 200k isn't a terrible COA at all. But you should absolutely retake unless you studied for 3+ months and hit the high end of your pt range.
I have no idea what this post is saying. Its confusing and nonsensical to me. All I got was that "Stanford is risky" and that's an lolno. Unless you're saying the OP might not get in, then sure, of course. But the OP could have way better options than sticker at Cal, all they need to do is score like 8+ points higher.muskies970 wrote:After taxes and living expenses a biglaw job of 160k leaves one with ~40-60k to put towards loans. Therefore unless once is getting 20k in scholarship a year offering a more in scholarship and values a year of their life that way it may not be the best option. Stanford is always a risky option no matter what your options and there's always the chance OP might not improve to those numbers.
risky for acceptance as your option for taking a year off. Way better options for getting back to the Cali market such as? and that warrant a year of foregone income?BigZuck wrote:I have no idea what this post is saying. Its confusing and nonsensical to me. All I got was that "Stanford is risky" and that's an lolno. Unless you're saying the OP might not get in, then sure, of course. But the OP could have way better options than sticker at Cal, all they need to do is score like 8+ points higher.muskies970 wrote:After taxes and living expenses a biglaw job of 160k leaves one with ~40-60k to put towards loans. Therefore unless once is getting 20k in scholarship a year offering a more in scholarship and values a year of their life that way it may not be the best option. Stanford is always a risky option no matter what your options and there's always the chance OP might not improve to those numbers.