Top Law Schools

So I just did a cost of living calculator online.

It said that a 120k salary in Seattle is the same as 184k salary in NYC. Is this actually true? I always wanted NYC biglaw so I could pay off loans faster, but now I'm realizing that Seattle is basically the same take-home pay albeit a lower dollar amount. Do these numbers seem accurate?

Also, if they are accurate, why do people even want NYC? Yeah the prestigious firms are there, but midsize Seattle or other west coast firms pay 120k or more which is on par with 180k in NYC.

Im starting to care less about prestige, and more about just locking down an SA at a midsize firm, and avoid all the biglaw bullshit at OCI

Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

WeeBey wrote: But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

Not only that, but Seattle firms generally don't increase base pay at market rates. By the time you're a mid-level associate at a big Seattle firm, your annual pay will likely be--between base and bonus--a good $100k behind that of your peers in NYC, SF, etc.

If you want to live in Seattle, and if you can get a big law job there, then go work in Seattle. But don't do it to save money.

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

is 2.5-3k really the average associates spend on rent?

mvp99 wrote:

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

is 2.5-3k really the average associates spend on rent?

In NY, hell yes.

Also, I hate how those bullshit online calculators never account for costs that are fixed. For example, if I'm paid 180k in NY, I make a lot more money than the Seattle guy, and spend more on rent than the Seattle guy. However, if me and the Seattle guy both want to take a vacation to Bora Bora, I've got more cash at my disposal, and the hotel won't charge him any less because he's from Seattle. Neither will the airline.

Isn't part of the problem also that "just do Seattle big/midlaw bro" is way easier said than done? Secondary markets just don't hire a lot of SAs.

The billables aren't even that much lower in secondary markets. They're still gonna make you do at least 1800, whereas NY is like 2000 min. Also, I'm guessing you are also more likely to be at the office without work (thus lower efficiency) at a secondary market. I just cant see secondary markets/midlaw having the same work flow coming in as NY biglaw. So I bet your still putting close to NY big laws hours in total, you just end up billing less.

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Isn't part of the problem also that "just do Seattle big/midlaw bro" is way easier said than done? Secondary markets just don't hire a lot of SAs.

Yes, that's a big part of the problem. Also, while mid law firms certainly exist, the vast majority do not start associates out "at $120K or more." I'd say $60K - $90K is more representative of the typical starting associate salary at a mid-law firm.

NYC firms are more prestigious than those based in Seattle. I can't even name any prestigious Seattle-based big law firms off the top of my head.

PresTTTigious wrote:NYC firms are more prestigious than those based in Seattle. I can't even name any prestigious Seattle-based big law firms off the top of my head.

You're only six posts in and you've already more than worn out your trolling welcome. This is not working.

rpupkin wrote:

PresTTTigious wrote:NYC firms are more prestigious than those based in Seattle. I can't even name any prestigious Seattle-based big law firms off the top of my head.

You're only six posts in and you've already more than worn out your trolling welcome. This is not working.

Is there anything in my previous statement that wasn't accurate? I admit my tone is perhaps ironic, but how is this considered trolling? I can name several prestigious firms based in Chicago, Boston, LA, DC, and obviously NY, but Seattle?

rpupkin wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Isn't part of the problem also that "just do Seattle big/midlaw bro" is way easier said than done? Secondary markets just don't hire a lot of SAs.

Yes, that's a big part of the problem. Also, while mid law firms certainly exist, the vast majority do not start associates out "at $120K or more." I'd say $60K - $90K is more representative of the typical starting associate salary at a mid-law firm.

Would have to disagree here. Been applying at a number of 50-100 atty firms in seattle that all start at 110 - 135, with 12-15k bonus for hitting billables.

PresTTTigious wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

PresTTTigious wrote:NYC firms are more prestigious than those based in Seattle. I can't even name any prestigious Seattle-based big law firms off the top of my head.

You're only six posts in and you've already more than worn out your trolling welcome. This is not working.

Is there anything in my previous statement that wasn't accurate? I admit my tone is perhaps ironic, but how is this considered trolling? I can name several prestigious firms based in Chicago, Boston, LA, DC, and obviously NY, but Seattle?

This is an alt account created to troll. Banned.

Anonymous User wrote:

rpupkin wrote:

A. Nony Mouse wrote:Isn't part of the problem also that "just do Seattle big/midlaw bro" is way easier said than done? Secondary markets just don't hire a lot of SAs.

Yes, that's a big part of the problem. Also, while mid law firms certainly exist, the vast majority do not start associates out "at $120K or more." I'd say $60K - $90K is more representative of the typical starting associate salary at a mid-law firm.

Would have to disagree here. Been applying at a number of 50-100 atty firms in seattle that all start at 110 - 135, with 12-15k bonus for hitting billables.

Off the top of my head, I can think of three firms in Seattle that meet this criteria. There may be a few more, but how many are we talking about here? What do you mean by "a number"? I stand by my earlier statement: most mid-law firms don't pay $120K+ to first-year associates.

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

$1,000 a month for a car?

kalvano wrote:

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

$1,000 a month for a car?

This. In what world does a car cost $1000/month?

In ref to your COL estimates. In smaller markets a decent apt is around $1200 ($1,000 savings over NYC) and a respectable [new] leased car $300, plus $100 for parking ($600 savings). In all $1,800 in monthly net savings that you can use toward tuition debt. Income is an entirely different matter.

acr wrote:

kalvano wrote:

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

$1,000 a month for a car?

This. In what world does a car cost $1000/month?

In the world called "accounting for the total cost of ownership" which would include down payment, monthly payment, maintenance/repairs, insurance, tags/registration, gas, and parking.

i think that the differences in col between different cities probably doesn't matter as much when you are younger and starting out because, as has already been mentioned itt, your biggest cost drivers are going to be fixed costs.

where i think it does start to matter is when you start having kids and want to buy a house. there is a pretty big difference in the cost of housing in good public school districts between small/mid cities and nyc/dc/sf. so that is something to consider.

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

You do realize there is no state income tax in WA right? It DOES make a huge fucking difference, dropping both state and city income tax.

Also you wouldn't spend $2k a month in Seattle on rent unless you really didn't care about blowing money. 1k a month for a car is high, but your transit costs aren't "zero" in NYC, they're still likely a couple/few hundred dollars between public transit, ubers, cabs. Then add in all the little ways it's cheaper, groceries, restaurants, etc and it all adds up.

I took somewhat of an income hit moving from NY to FL, but factoring in lower COL plus no state income tax, I'm saving more and living more comfortably.

anonnymouse wrote:

acr wrote:

kalvano wrote:

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

$1,000 a month for a car?

This. In what world does a car cost $1000/month?

In the world called "accounting for the total cost of ownership" which would include down payment, monthly payment, maintenance/repairs, insurance, tags/registration, gas, and parking.

Maybe if you insist on leasing an M4. But otherwise, that figure is way off.

anonnymouse wrote:

acr wrote:

kalvano wrote:

WeeBey wrote:Ughh... 120k "take-home" is not the same as 180k. Your after-tax income is probably 25-30k more in NYC That calculation is usually a measure the price things (rent/food/utilities) cost.

In NYC you probably wont drive, and you'd live in a small apartment paying 2.5-3k a month. But in Seattle, or whatever other market your thinking of, you like will have a car (1k a month), and a bigger apartment (2k or so month). Nevertheless, if you want to really pay off those loans you could rent a crappy place for $500 a month and take the bus. Even then, I dont think 120k in Seattle would let you pay off more loans than 180k in NYC.

But truth be told, in Seattle I think market is closer 145 and in NYC bonuses are much bigger (50k for 3rd years last year).

$1,000 a month for a car?

This. In what world does a car cost $1000/month?

In the world called "accounting for the total cost of ownership" which would include down payment, monthly payment, maintenance/repairs, insurance, tags/registration, gas, and parking.

I don't doubt you CAN spend $1,000 a month for a car, but you absolutely don't have to.

1) Insurance shouldn't be more than $150 a month if you are reasonably competent driver
2) Tags/registration are less than $10 a month in most locales
3) Biglaw associates can afford to pay cash for a car, and why do you HAVE to buy a rapidly depreciating new car when there are lots of good used cars?
4) You don't have to pay for parking everywhere

My TCO for my last car was less than $3k for the year including insurance ($100 month), gas ($50/month), repairs/maintenance ($300/yr), depreciation (essentially none, car was fully depreciated when purchased), parking (less than $100/yr), registration/inspection (~$100/yr).

In any event, I agree those COL calculators are off because they assume you are going to live the same way between locales. You aren't. The NYC associate is going to rent a 500sq ft apartment and not drive. The Dallas associate is going to buy a 3,000sq foot house and drive. Their actual spending probably won't be much different. Plus, loan payments are the same no matter where you live.

WeeBey wrote:The billables aren't even that much lower in secondary markets. They're still gonna make you do at least 1800, whereas NY is like 2000 min. Also, I'm guessing you are also more likely to be at the office without work (thus lower efficiency) at a secondary market. I just cant see secondary markets/midlaw having the same work flow coming in as NY biglaw. So I bet your still putting close to NY big laws hours in total, you just end up billing less.

Just commenting got say 200 hours is actually a lot. If you work 5 days a week, that's billing 10 hours a day for a whole month. Shit, just typing that made me sad.

Yeah, I was just getting dressed this morning and thought ''that post about a car being 1k a month is just way too high'' lmao. 1k a month is like leasing a Mercedes C63. My friend has a leased 2016 lexus and its like 350 a month.

Anonymous User wrote:Yeah, I was just getting dressed this morning and thought ''that post about a car being 1k a month is just way too high'' lmao. 1k a month is like leasing a Mercedes C63. My friend has a leased 2016 lexus and its like 350 a month.

if I can't drive an AMG GT then I don't know why I went to LS for