gk101 wrote:TheThriller wrote:Luein wrote:I think this is a very personal choice--follow your gut: are you happy in mid-law with less prestigious clients in a smaller (I'm speculating) city? For many, this would drive them toward W&S. (See above poster.) You should know, however, that the COL in Chicago is very low--I'm not sure what you consider "dirt cheap," but COL in Chicago is about 25% of that in NYC or 40% of that in LA. (Think spacious high-rise overlooking Lake Michigan for <$2000, or something more modest for much less.) Part of the reason for this is: Chicago is freezing in the winter, like legit miserable.
Have you ever lived in Chicago? Good luck finding your spacious high-rise for 2k.
You can absolutely find decent sized apartments in high-rises for around 2k in Chicago but lol at the 25% of NYC number.
I agree, you definitely can if your definition of spacious does not = penthouse.
OP, Chicago is a great city with great CoL for paying off loans (much better than NYC if firm pays market). With you debt load, I would go to W&S. But, this is a very personal decision and you should do whatever you think would be best for you. Maybe visit Chitown a little more and then decide.
Also, W&S has been somewhat shaky lately but this summer I think that the offer rate was back up to normal, maybe the worst is behind, or maybe not, I'd look into this, but personally, while it would be relevant when comparing market-paying, similar firms in chicago (I would probably take Mayer or Katten over W&S b/c of this), but it would not stop me from going there in your situation. Others could disagree.
Edit: also pay increases at W&S would be market, probably much lower at other firm = even bigger difference in pay after 3 or 4 years