Top Law Schools

Only law schools are dumb enough to think people about to make 160k need financial aid. Instead of just reducing tuition across the board.

What's your debt level at now? I think you could've used some financial aid bro - I sure could've.

Also systemically maybe there's a tax benefit of some sort in charging higher tuition and giving financial aid ?

Capitol_Idea wrote:What's your debt level at now? I think you could've used some financial aid bro - I sure could've.

Also systemically maybe there's a tax benefit of some sort in charging higher tuition and giving financial aid ?

It should just be cheaper in general. But giving aid to some people because their parents are poor is stupid. Especially since the only schools who do it are ticket punches for Upper Middle Class jobs.

I'm down to ONLY 177k.

Capitol_Idea wrote:What's your debt level at now? I think you could've used some financial aid bro - I sure could've.

Also systemically maybe there's a tax benefit of some sort in charging higher tuition and giving financial aid ?

Well, there is this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... nts-bills/

Minnietron wrote:

Capitol_Idea wrote:What's your debt level at now? I think you could've used some financial aid bro - I sure could've.

Also systemically maybe there's a tax benefit of some sort in charging higher tuition and giving financial aid ?

Well, there is this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... nts-bills/

Yeah but we're talking about non-garbage real schools here.

Capitol_Idea wrote:

Minnietron wrote:

Capitol_Idea wrote:What's your debt level at now? I think you could've used some financial aid bro - I sure could've.

Also systemically maybe there's a tax benefit of some sort in charging higher tuition and giving financial aid ?

Well, there is this: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/won ... nts-bills/

Yeah but we're talking about non-garbage real schools here.

I was unaware these existed. I thought there were just varying degrees of garbage and fakery.

I'm just curious why you think that students from a low income background don't deserve financial aid? Isn't that the whole point of financial assistance? That's why some aid is need based off of independent student income or, in the case of dependent students of a low income family, and not simply merit based. Not every student can afford the cost of law school. In fact, it should be the reverse, in the sense that students whose parents hit over a certain income level should be denied grants/fellowships/merit based scholarships. Privileged kids obviously don't need any aid because their parents make enough to support them through school. Sometimes, the students from disadvantaged backgrounds will work harder in law school and take the financial aid seriously, since such a reward can help one succeed without the worry about the cost. Did you have to pay for school out of your pocket/loan because you didn't qualify for a scholarship?

NycGirl12 wrote:I'm just curious why you think that students from a low income background don't deserve financial aid? Isn't that the whole point of financial assistance? That's why some aid is need based off of independent student income or, in the case of dependent students of a low income family, and not simply merit based. Not every student can afford the cost of law school. In fact, it should be the reverse, in the sense that students whose parents hit over a certain income level should be denied grants/fellowships/merit based scholarships. Privileged kids obviously don't need any aid because their parents make enough to support them through school. Sometimes, the students from disadvantaged backgrounds will work harder in law school and take the financial aid seriously, since such a reward can help one succeed without the worry about the cost. Did you have to pay for school out of your pocket/loan because you didn't qualify for a scholarship?

Because everyone loses their job when they start law school. We all are low income. Sure some percentage have rich parents, but most don't.

>Did you have to pay for school out of your pocket/loan because you didn't qualify for a scholarship?

Almost everyone pays a ton out of pocket/loan.

Thats why it's a dumb system.

I think this is why there is only a limited amount of non-repayable financial aid available at each school, and typically, they are provided based on income and or merit based. If the law schools handed out scholarships to everyone, then this would defeat the purpose of anything being merit/need based and eliminate the need for competitive scores. Not to mention the schools would lose money by giving too many handouts.

NycGirl12 wrote:I'm just curious why you think that students from a low income background don't deserve financial aid? Isn't that the whole point of financial assistance? That's why some aid is need based off of independent student income or, in the case of dependent students of a low income family, and not simply merit based. Not every student can afford the cost of law school. In fact, it should be the reverse, in the sense that students whose parents hit over a certain income level should be denied grants/fellowships/merit based scholarships. Privileged kids obviously don't need any aid because their parents make enough to support them through school. Sometimes, the students from disadvantaged backgrounds will work harder in law school and take the financial aid seriously, since such a reward can help one succeed without the worry about the cost. Did you have to pay for school out of your pocket/loan because you didn't qualify for a scholarship?

Because it doesn't matter who is low income or not low income when it comes to paying $240,000 in tuition and living expenses. Most people get it from the same place - the federal government. And I don't see why the kid from the poor family who is taking out $240,000 should receive "financial aid" anymore than the kid from the rich family who is taking out $240,000 in loans. If your parents aren't paying the fraudlike level of tuition, it doesn't matter how much parents earn.

NycGirl12 wrote:Not every student can afford the cost of law school.

Literally every single student can afford law school with loans.

NycGirl12 wrote:In fact, it should be the reverse, in the sense that students whose parents hit over a certain income level should be denied grants/fellowships/merit based scholarships. Privileged kids obviously don't need any aid because their parents make enough to support them through school.

Parental wealth is completely irrelevant unless they are actually paying your tuition. Entering law students are adults in their mid-20s, sometimes older, and dad footing the bill isn't part of the equation.

First of all, 6 figure salaries are far from guaranteed for the general law student. Below median students enrolled in schools ranked below 40ish (so a majority of law students) are not going to be able to enter big law. So the argument that law students are going to be set for life and can afford full-pay is incorrect. Law school is a risky investment, so I doubt colleges could keep application and matriculation numbers up without a chance for discounted tuition.

Merit scholarships are a tool for schools to attract otherwise unobtainable students. If you're the 20th best school, but start offering full rides to kids who would otherwise go to a top 10 school, you can increase the quality of your student body. That's why merit aid exists. It's a recruiting tool for law schools, not some kind of social justice economic program.

I do think that students should not be penalized for having affluent parents, especially since many law students are in their mid 20s and are independents. However, this is a minor issue because the majority of aid handed out is actually merit aid, which is not affected by financial standing.

The problem no one discusses about higher ed finance is that eventually the full pay students will revolt and choose the affordable in-state option versus the expensive prestigious school. There is a tuition bubble that will burst when sticker price will become prohibitively expensive and schools can't meet their tuition quotas, at least without accepting a large number of unqualified students. Maybe some colleges will tighten their belts and reduce costs (cutting back on administrators, luxuries, and executive salaries), but I have a feeling some schools will just throw their hands up in the air like Sweet Briar and say uncle.

I still don't agree with you. The amount the needs to be repaid is not affordable for someone who already started off poor, and right out of school they get hit with a huge bill from what they borrowed. This loan repayment, coupled with the fact that the disadvantaged student already didn't have the funds to begin with will in turn create a bigger hole than he or she could climb out of. If I were to follow your logic, kids who start law school would not have a chance to generate an income, since most law students are fresh out of undergrad. When did the chance to have a full time job arise? The student cannot claim independent student status without sufficient income. Also, there are plenty students who are still supported by parents well into grad school. That's why the FAFSA has an optional section for law or medical students to enter parent financial data for financial aid purposes. The point is to support disadvantaged students, not students from an upper middle class to upper class background who have options. It's about equal access. Let's level the playing field for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. And by the way, it's a known fact that many law students come from wealthy families and definitely fit the privileged child stereotype.

NycGirl12 wrote:I still don't agree with you. The amount the needs to be repaid is not affordable for someone who already started off poor, and right out of school they get hit with a huge bill from what they borrowed. This loan repayment, coupled with the fact that the disadvantaged student already didn't have the funds to begin with will in turn create a bigger hole than he or she could climb out of. If I were to follow your logic, kids who start law school would not have a chance to generate an income, since most law students are fresh out of undergrad. When did the chance to have a full time job arise? The student cannot claim independent student status without sufficient income. Also, there are plenty students who are still supported by parents well into grad school. That's why the FAFSA has an optional section for law or medical students to enter parent financial data for financial aid purposes. The point is to support disadvantaged students, not students from an upper middle class to upper class background who have options. It's about equal access. Let's level the playing field for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. And by the way, it's a known fact that many law students come from wealthy families and definitely fit the privileged child stereotype.

You are exceptionally stupid.

Why, because I speak the truth? You're an exceptional moron, who is probably one of the spoiled rich kids who can't stand low income students as competition. By the way, don't flame. I don't have enough food to feed the trolls.

NycGirl12 wrote:Why, because I speak the truth? You're an exceptional moron, who is probably one of the spoiled rich kids who can't stand low income students as competition. By the way, don't flame. I don't have enough food to feed the trolls.

lol DF is white trash

KJartan seems like pervert based on his numerous responses on posts that have to do with sex.

NycGirl12 wrote:I still don't agree with you. The amount the needs to be repaid is not affordable for someone who already started off poor, and right out of school they get hit with a huge bill from what they borrowed. This loan repayment, coupled with the fact that the disadvantaged student already didn't have the funds to begin with will in turn create a bigger hole than he or she could climb out of. If I were to follow your logic, kids who start law school would not have a chance to generate an income, since most law students are fresh out of undergrad. When did the chance to have a full time job arise? The student cannot claim independent student status without sufficient income. Also, there are plenty students who are still supported by parents well into grad school. That's why the FAFSA has an optional section for law or medical students to enter parent financial data for financial aid purposes. The point is to support disadvantaged students, not students from an upper middle class to upper class background who have options. It's about equal access. Let's level the playing field for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. And by the way, it's a known fact that many law students come from wealthy families and definitely fit the privileged child stereotype.

How is the amount to be repaid not affordable to someone with poor parents but is affordable to someone with wealthy parents if those parents aren't paying the bill?

Low-income students should be able to get lower interest loans that are capped. Also, first priority for merit based scholarships. Let's see how fast the trolls come out from under the bridge now!

NycGirl12 wrote:Why, because I speak the truth? You're an exceptional moron, who is probably one of the spoiled rich kids who can't stand low income students as competition. By the way, don't flame. I don't have enough food to feed the trolls.

The point, which you fail to grasp, is that parental income is a shitty proxy for support. Most UMC law students finance law school the same way as poor students: government loans.

It looks like the trolls came out after they smelled the food!

Lol you're gonna get pwned in law school just like your poor parents got pwned in life.

..