Top Law Schools

At HLS, Students are expected to take out 40-50k in loans a year, and the rest of need is met with grants. Doesn't this create a weird perverse incentive where someone who's been accepted, and is already at the point where any additional need is met in grants instead of loans, should invest the maximum amount in retirement accounts, and then spend all the rest of their money before submitting their aid paperwork?

It seems like there are people who have enough money to actually make a dent in the loan size, and they're better off keeping all their money to reduce the loan. If they're poor enough to qualify for grants, then they might as well spend it, because it makes literally no difference to what their debt will be.

This seems stupid, and I have no idea why the aid structure is set up this way. Any thoughts? Wouldn't it make more sense from a policy perspective to require personal contributions based on their previous income (this is ignoring K-JDs I guess).

your suggestion is no better - many people give up their jobs to attend H, and therefore don't have that "previous income" you suggest be the basis for determining aid.

I mean, yes they quit their jobs, but if someone had a 60k job for three years, it seems fair to assume that they spent three years saving 3-5k of that a year, and make that a minimum contribution. Obviously kids would be taken into account, as they are now.

SnakySalmon wrote:I mean, yes they quit their jobs, but if someone had a 60k job for three years, it seems fair to assume that they spent three years saving 3-5k of that a year, and make that a minimum contribution. Obviously kids would be taken into account, as they are now.

Why is it fair to assume that? If they graduated with student loans and were living in NYC, that's not a lot of extra cash floating around.

On a separate note, aren't your assets taken into account?

should invest the maximum amount in retirement accounts,

dunno about HLS, but for undergrad, all those retirement funds are added back into income for need-based aid calculations.

So they should punish those who work before law school. But it's totes fine you can take need aid then go make 160k + bonus?

Desert Fox wrote:So they should punish those who work before law school. But it's totes fine you can take need aid then go make 160k + bonus?

They punish people who work before law school and save now, while rewarding people who blow all their money. How is that OK?

Need-based aid is stupid as fuck, but not for the reason you suggest.

Considering just COL is a massive amount of debt for LS, and a large percentage of t14 grads would need 6 figure loans to cover the whole cost, tons of people significant "need." Why does it matter that my parents make 200k/yr if they can't even make a dent in what I need to borrow? Why does it matter if I saved $15k when COA is 20x that?

Law schools fairly place a bigger emphasis on what you're income is when you leave than what it was when you came in, through LRAP.

SnakySalmon wrote:

Desert Fox wrote:So they should punish those who work before law school. But it's totes fine you can take need aid then go make 160k + bonus?

They punish people who work before law school and save now, while rewarding people who blow all their money. How is that OK?

....Obama?

Need based aid only really exists at HYS and is probably how they compete with each other for certain students whose families have lower income.

No reasonably prudent person spends all their savings so they can hustle Harvard out of a some free money.
No one feels sorry for someone having to pay to go to HYS.

legends159 wrote:Need based aid only really exists at HYS

probably the biggest flame on TLS

guano wrote:

legends159 wrote:Need based aid only really exists at HYS

probably the biggest flame on TLS

Is it? In my experience the 'need based aid' at other schools had a fairly strong correlation with LSAT scores even if it did also have some relationship to income level.

guano wrote:

legends159 wrote:Need based aid only really exists at HYS

probably the biggest flame on TLS

Well. I am suspicious of your claim, but I can only say definitively that it does NOT exist at Northwestern. Because I had a frank talk with Financial Aid about it.

DELG wrote:

guano wrote:

legends159 wrote:Need based aid only really exists at HYS

probably the biggest flame on TLS

Well. I am suspicious of your claim, but I can only say definitively that it does NOT exist at Northwestern. Because I had a frank talk with Financial Aid about it.

While it is declining in prevalence, there are still a number of non-HYS schools that give out a decent amount of need based scholarships. However, the amount tends to be relatively low, and usually cannot be used in conjunction with merit based aid.

guano wrote:

legends159 wrote:Need based aid only really exists at HYS

probably the biggest flame on TLS

Some schools state what aid is given as need based while others just give need + merit as a it as a single scholarship.

Upenn and Berkeley explicitly stated what was need and merit. Others, like Cornell and Duke, simply gave need + merit in the form of a single scholarship.

If a school won't give need aid off the wait list, to transfers, to current students whose circumstances change during attendance, and also doesn't use a fairly transparent formula to determine who has need, I don't think they really have need based aid.

DELG wrote:If a school won't give need aid off the wait list, to transfers, to current students whose circumstances change during attendance, and also doesn't use a fairly transparent formula to determine who has need, I don't think they really have need based aid.

There's a limit to funds made available for need based aid (usually significantly less than for merit aid). When those funds are allocated, there's nothing left. Ergo, it makes sense that there's no aid left over for waitlisters or transfer students.

guano wrote:

DELG wrote:If a school won't give need aid off the wait list, to transfers, to current students whose circumstances change during attendance, and also doesn't use a fairly transparent formula to determine who has need, I don't think they really have need based aid.

There's a limit to funds made available for need based aid (usually significantly less than for merit aid). When those funds are allocated, there's nothing left. Ergo, it makes sense that there's no aid left over for waitlisters or transfer students.

So they allocate it all at the same time as merit aid, without contemplating the fact they will have needy transfers and waitlisters, and inconsistently across similarly situated applicants, because...?

My totally baseless suspicion is that it's given different names because it comes from different funding sources, but is still largely used to accomplish the same goals as merit aid.

Why wouldn't they estimate how much they'd need? Oh because they use need aid as merit aid.

Desert Fox wrote:Why wouldn't they estimate how much they'd need? Oh because they use need aid as merit aid.

HYS still funds transfers

Maybe they need to run a seminar on budgeting need aid

Desert Fox wrote:Why wouldn't they estimate how much they'd need? Oh because they use need aid as merit aid.

It's opaque for a reason, and who can blame them.

I remember reading somewhere that CounselerNeb stated he received 25k in need-based aid from GULC as a transfer...