Is Law School Worth it? Forum

[smokeylarue]

Lol OP only asked about whether law school would pay off financially. Anyone talking about quality of life of Biglaw, being a software engineer at Facebook or entrepreneur instead, or how non-fulfilling your legal job is just completely ignored the point of this thread.

[sunyplatt]

A lot of interesting opinions on this thread. Nevertheless I am torn on whether or not to attend law school. My BA is only getting me about 28K-38K a year and I'm tired of just taking jobs with minimal upwards mobility both financially and with respect to career potential. I want to feel like I accomplished something at the end of the day and it would be even better to earn a respectable salary doing so. Law school seems to be highly variable regarding success rate. I might attend anyway I don't know but I have to admit as many others have mentioned possessing only a BA will only get you so far financially.

[lagamemnon]

I like biglaw so far. I think law school was worth it.

Biglaw is rosy.

How far in are you?

I’m guessing 1st year and not corporate. But there are definitely people who like biglaw. I used to be one of them. In my view it depends on how much status you get from your job title and to a lesser extent, income.
If I did biglaw hiring I would go for the middle class (or even lower)strivers every time.The people who went to Harvard over a full ride elsewhere, and not to use Harvard’s version of lrap, are another good source.

Lolz. I'm corporate. Not sure how you both struggled to catch the sarcasm, but post was meant as a joke becaus npret and a bunch of anons are getting all fired up over this thread, which has completely devolved.

But, I generally like my job (corporate, biglaw).

Why don't you answer the question? We all know you're probably just a stub year. You're not even really in biglaw until you know enough to be useful. Until that point you're a glorified paralegal.

[lawhopeful100]

One other point to add that I’m not sure has been said yet. I’m coming up on two years of practicing and spent the first year and a half or so at a 25 attorney firm before lateraling to biglaw. The smaller firm was the same hours, but significantly less pay and less autonomy. I think this cuts both ways, for me it’s made me enjoy my biglaw job (so far), but for people automatically assuming life gets better if you lateral to a smaller firm, that may not necessarily be the case.

[JohnnieSockran]

I like biglaw so far. I think law school was worth it.

Biglaw is rosy.

How far in are you?

I’m guessing 1st year and not corporate. But there are definitely people who like biglaw. I used to be one of them. In my view it depends on how much status you get from your job title and to a lesser extent, income.
If I did biglaw hiring I would go for the middle class (or even lower)strivers every time.The people who went to Harvard over a full ride elsewhere, and not to use Harvard’s version of lrap, are another good source.

Lolz. I'm corporate. Not sure how you both struggled to catch the sarcasm, but post was meant as a joke becaus npret and a bunch of anons are getting all fired up over this thread, which has completely devolved.

But, I generally like my job (corporate, biglaw).

Why don't you answer the question? We all know you're probably just a stub year. You're not even really in biglaw until you know enough to be useful. Until that point you're a glorified paralegal.

Wow, you're so right. You win.

[Anonymous User]

Lol OP only asked about whether law school would pay off financially. Anyone talking about quality of life of Biglaw, being a software engineer at Facebook or entrepreneur instead, or how non-fulfilling your legal job is just completely ignored the point of this thread.

And we're saying a computer science degree will pay off financially more. We're offering a better alternative.

It's akin to asking, "Hey should I buy this Chevy, I'm looking for good value" and someone going, "Go look at a Toyota, they last longer and resell for more after."

This thread has been too rosy, shortsided, and unrealistic based on my experience and my observations of others.

I feel the loss of experienced voices has crippled the quality of advice here.

[/quote]

Oh yes, the loss of bitter, angry people who think they're brilliant because they have a "t14 JD" and spend their days posting 10,000 about it. Huge crippling effect.

[Anonymous User]

lol. it sounds like you're the bitter/angry one.

[MillllerTime]

Lol OP only asked about whether law school would pay off financially. Anyone talking about quality of life of Biglaw, being a software engineer at Facebook or entrepreneur instead, or how non-fulfilling your legal job is just completely ignored the point of this thread.

And we're saying a computer science degree will pay off financially more. We're offering a better alternative.

It's akin to asking, "Hey should I buy this Chevy, I'm looking for good value" and someone going, "Go look at a Toyota, they last longer and resell for more after."

This thread has been too rosy, shortsided, and unrealistic based on my experience and my observations of others.

I feel the loss of experienced voices has crippled the quality of advice here.

Bro. We get it. Law is not the best profession in the world. It's certainly not for everyone and I second all of the cautionary words in this thread about only going to a top school with a scholarship or a strong regional school with a full ride (or close to it). But it can be the right move, both financially and otherwise, for a certain group of people.

You're basically trying to tell a bunch of hockey players that they should switch to golf because the money is better and the weather is warmer. Or if you want to stick with car analogies - you're trying to sell a Ferrari to someone who came in looking for a Camry.

[Anonymous User]

Bro. We get it. Law is not the best profession in the world. It's certainly not for everyone and I second all of the cautionary words in this thread about only going to a top school with a scholarship or a strong regional school with a full ride (or close to it). But it can be the right move, both financially and otherwise, for a certain group of people.

You're basically trying to tell a bunch of hockey players that they should switch to golf because the money is better and the weather is warmer. Or if you want to stick with car analogies - you're trying to sell a Ferrari to someone who came in looking for a Camry.

I wrote in the beginning that if you're interested in law and the many types of legal practices, and you're not just in it for the money,then it's worth it financially. I'm not trying to convince anyone legitimately passionate about hockey to switch to golf.

I think if you love the practice of law and or are intrigued by trial work, then a job as a prosecutor or whatever other law job you find that you enjoy that pays less than software engineering is well worth it. Well worth it even if it takes you 10 years to payoff your loans.

But we don't have that scenario at all here. We have the equivalent of someone asking, "Hey if the major investment in hockey equipment worth it, I want to become a pro athlete?." So if they only care about the money as a pro athlete in any sport because they don't care about the enjoyment from playing, then yes I'd suggest baseball or golf where there are more players, careers last longer, you don't have to have high endurance, and cheaper starting costs etc.

If you're just looking for the biggest financial payoff for your investment in tuition/school without much care in subject matter (and judging by how often the $180,000 salaries at big firms have been mentioned in this thread versus actual interest in legal practice areas), then there are much better options with better payoffs such as software development or in the tech industry.

I personally think it's one of the best, balanced professions. You can get a little bit of office work, interactions with clients. Or you can try to climb a very strictly defined corporate ladder. Or you can do unique things like go to trial or start your own firm. Not that many professions offer this many different scenarios.

But if you just want financial payoff and the cheapest investment? Software.

[MillllerTime]

Bro. We get it. Law is not the best profession in the world. It's certainly not for everyone and I second all of the cautionary words in this thread about only going to a top school with a scholarship or a strong regional school with a full ride (or close to it). But it can be the right move, both financially and otherwise, for a certain group of people.

You're basically trying to tell a bunch of hockey players that they should switch to golf because the money is better and the weather is warmer. Or if you want to stick with car analogies - you're trying to sell a Ferrari to someone who came in looking for a Camry.

I wrote in the beginning that if you're interested in law and the many types of legal practices, and you're not just in it for the money,then it's worth it financially. I'm not trying to convince anyone legitimately passionate about hockey to switch to golf.

I think if you love the practice of law and or are intrigued by trial work, then a job as a prosecutor or whatever other law job you find that you enjoy that pays less than software engineering is well worth it. Well worth it even if it takes you 10 years to payoff your loans.

But we don't have that scenario at all here. We have the equivalent of someone asking, "Hey if the major investment in hockey equipment worth it, I want to become a pro athlete?." So if they only care about the money as a pro athlete in any sport because they don't care about the enjoyment from playing, then yes I'd suggest baseball or golf where there are more players, careers last longer, you don't have to have high endurance, and cheaper starting costs etc.

If you're just looking for the biggest financial payoff for your investment in tuition/school without much care in subject matter (and judging by how often the $180,000 salaries at big firms have been mentioned in this thread versus actual interest in legal practice areas), then there are much better options with better payoffs such as software development or in the tech industry.

I personally think it's one of the best, balanced professions. You can get a little bit of office work, interactions with clients. Or you can try to climb a very strictly defined corporate ladder. Or you can do unique things like go to trial or start your own firm. Not that many professions offer this many different scenarios.

But if you just want financial payoff and the cheapest investment? Software.

I just disagree about the skill flexibility of the people who are making the "is law school worth it?" decision. Most - myself included - are not equally capable of reading legal documents and writing code.

[nealric]

I just disagree about the skill flexibility of the people who are making the "is law school worth it?" decision. Most - myself included - are not equally capable of reading legal documents and writing code.

Right. I took an introductory coding course in college. It was well taught and up to date for the time, but I loathed coding. It just didn't jive with how my mind works. Even if someone offered me a coding job for 30% more pay tomorrow with similar hours and the same job security, I wouldn't take it because I simply don't like it. I think the comparison between Hockey and Golf is apt, although I can concede it's a more plausible switch from being a lawyer to a tech person .

[Npret]

Lol OP only asked about whether law school would pay off financially. Anyone talking about quality of life of Biglaw, being a software engineer at Facebook or entrepreneur instead, or how non-fulfilling your legal job is just completely ignored the point of this thread.

And we're saying a computer science degree will pay off financially more. We're offering a better alternative.

It's akin to asking, "Hey should I buy this Chevy, I'm looking for good value" and someone going, "Go look at a Toyota, they last longer and resell for more after."

This thread has been too rosy, shortsided, and unrealistic based on my experience and my observations of others.

I feel the loss of experienced voices has crippled the quality of advice here.

Bro. We get it. Law is not the best profession in the world. It's certainly not for everyone and I second all of the cautionary words in this thread about only going to a top school with a scholarship or a strong regional school with a full ride (or close to it). But it can be the right move, both financially and otherwise, for a certain group of people.

You're basically trying to tell a bunch of hockey players that they should switch to golf because the money is better and the weather is warmer. Or if you want to stick with car analogies - you're trying to sell a Ferrari to someone who came in looking for a Camry.

I’ve never, ever given people advice on what they should do instead. I have seen law school be a huge expensive mistake for many people. I’ve seen how miserable many people become and how they leave big law as fast as they can, even the people here who posted idiotic stuff like “that’s why they call it work” or “I used to be a roofer in Texas.”

If people want to ignore or not at least explore warnings and suggestions that law may not be the answer they seek, that’s on them. At least they have heard it, unlike in the early years before LST and mandated disclosures, when everyone thought the oversaturated law field was a 6 figure career for life.

It doesn’t help to belittle people who try to tell you to slow down and think carefully, before you take out those loans.
People see $200,000 and dont think beyond that - most grads don’t even know what their actual debt is and most 0Ls don’t figure it out, because they want to ignore it. Even that is better now that you can take 30 years to pay it back. If you want a mortgage on your life.

What I honestly never understood is why people aren’t blind with rage about the unnecessary cost of law schools at every level. Law schools are cash cows supporting the rest of the university in many cases.

If you’re a middle class workaholic overachiever who doesn’t need sleep and who manages to beat the curve (which people like to also ignore and misunderstand -short version if you get a 95 but 10% or whatever percent is set before the semester starts, get 96- you're not getting an A) and who can interview reasonably well, you could be fine.

There is the tiny, tiny percent of people who just rock law without trying that hard and even make partner early.(I’ve known 2 - ones a con law professor and Supreme Court practioner, the other was 4th in class at Harvard and never studied according to his class mates.) But I wouldn’t expect to be them. Most lawyers are grinders who can write decently.

I’m sure all the experts here know all about this stuff and that’s why they laugh, but most people are still completely ignorant.

[Npret]

Lol OP only asked about whether law school would pay off financially. Anyone talking about quality of life of Biglaw, being a software engineer at Facebook or entrepreneur instead, or how non-fulfilling your legal job is just completely ignored the point of this thread.

How can we guess what will happen to OP? Law pays off for some people, but it’s not a guarantee for anyone. My points about Biglaw go to the longevity people can expect in their career there and the resultant lack of financial predictability. A big reason for the lack of longevity is that people hate doing it for more than a few years, so I think it’s relevant. Incompetence is another reason; making an early bad impression is another. My point is that law is unstable for most people and that needs to be considered when asking if it’s worth it financially.

Actually anyone going to law school for the money, without understanding the job, or without understanding that law school teaches you little about practicing law, or without even wanting to be a lawyer, needs to wake up and do more research. I don’t mean to talk down to anyone, but law school isn’t something you should just go do because it’s the easiest option.

[Anonymous User]

It doesn’t help to belittle people who try to tell you to slow down and think carefully, before you take out those loans.
People see $200,000 and dont think beyond that - most grads don’t even know what their actual debt is and most 0Ls don’t figure it out, because they want to ignore it. Even that is better now that you can take 30 years to pay it back. If you want a mortgage on your life.

What I honestly never understood is why people aren’t blind with rage about the unnecessary cost of law schools at every level. Law schools are cash cows supporting the rest of the university in many cases.

Most grads and 0Ls could figure out their law school debt easily, they just don't want to. To quote Jamie Shipley in the Big Short, "People hate to think about bad things happening so they always underestimate their likelihood."

Students have an idea that they owe a ton of loans but they just don't want to think about the chance of them not paying it back, so they block it out. It has nothing to do with knowledge, they just choose to not think about it or to know.

As for law schools being cash cows - many universities are cash cows. A job at a university is one of the best/cushiest careers, and someone's got to fund their salaries.

A lot of these overpriced law school with horrible employment rates are connected to private liberal arts colleges where you can pay a similar price for a Bachelors in Classical Studies, 12th Century History or a Master's in pre-B.C.E. Studies. Many people opt for these programs over a STEM degree for half the price a the local state school with way better job placements. It's just the reality of the education market.

Law school's not "unique" in high tuition prices and low ideal career prospects. Law students just whine the most about it. As long as federal loans are still available, people will pay $150,000+ for law school, MBA, or getting their Master's in Film Studies, Anthropology, or The History of 10th Century Art. There's just no "anthropologyschooltransparency.com" because a lot of those students aren't wired like that.

I just disagree about the skill flexibility of the people who are making the "is law school worth it?" decision. Most - myself included - are not equally capable of reading legal documents and writing code.

I agree that the problem with Computer Science and Computer Engineering classes is that it requires a very different skill set. And I've seen on law forums, including this one where people assume because they went to a good law school that they can do well in a decent CS or CE program, when weeder CS/CE classes and exams can make law school look like an absolute joke.

But, assuming OP only cares about money, if you're below-average to average as a CS/CE student, your outcomes are still probably better than in law. Just for the sole reason that many software and tech companies do not look at grades. So you can struggle academically in a CS/CE program and still have better outcomes than a below-average student in law school.

So if you got that D- in electromagnetics, a C in Applied Linear Algebra, but in your 3rd/4th year you have yourself a real interesting project on GitHub and have learned to code well - you can still qualify for many great jobs. Even if you're below average as a programmer, you can still land a job that pays $100,000-$130,000 with great benefits as a solutions/sales engineer at a tech company where management will actively keep you far away from code or make you barely code anything because they know you suck. I know some programmers that exist like this.

The liklihood of landing a job that pays $80,000-$200,000 if you're below average to average with a CS degree is much higher than with a JD. Are you interviewing at Wachtell Lipton or Cravath with a 2.7 GPA? Because I know highly successful people at Facebook or Google with C averages.

Also, the experience is a lot different. Whereas in law school everyone is worried about the curve and trying to get an A, in a lot of CS/CE classes a decent amount of people are just hoping to pass and the curve helps you out. There will be finals where the class average is like a 55% but the curve will pull everyone up. There's a lot less uncertainty and it's less a rat race to the top during finals.

So, I don't think you have to be a "good" or have natural ability in applied math to get financial payoff in tech at all. I think it only becomes comparable financially if you went to a very good law school or have top grades at any other law school versus a below average to average CS/CE student. Or if you compare the financial payoff of solo/small firm PI attorneys versus programmers at startups (which route is more likely to payoff, how likely are good to big financial payoffs, how likely is failure).

The market demand is just so different between law and tech. With the former, there's stiff competition for few openings, for the latter they're constantly flying recruiters to Europe and Asia because they can't fill openings with Americans fast enough. If you're mediocre in tech, there's not enough STEM grads to fill the pipeline anyways, a tech company is way more likely to take a chance on you.

[plurilingue]

1. It's only due to prevailing central bank policy since the global financial crisis that the cost of living in California/New York has been as elevated as it is. The macroeconomic conditions of the past few years are decidedly abnormal; there has been excess liquidity in the system due to low interest rates and especially quantitative easing, and that excess liquidity is most conspicuous in any place where the local economy is tied to financial asset prices (i.e., stocks; bonds). While there are many wealthy individuals in any large American city who have benefited from central bank policy, the most notable are Manhattan and Northern California. (I mention Manhattan because, although wealthy, Westchester County, N.Y., Long Island, N.Y., and Greenwich, Conn. are by and large not doing well these days.) Accordingly, rent for a renovated, proper one-bedroom apartment in either place has risen to ~$4,000/month. And if you're looking to buy, well, God help you: https://www.zillow.com/homes/recently_s ... ect/13_zm/

2. Excess liquidity in the system/government-backed cheap credit has also permitted law schools to consistently raise tuition at 3-6% a year despite harsh prospects in a stagnating industry. (After all, what is 3.5% annual interest on $300k or even $400k of student loan debt? Given starting salaries, tuition could go up much more before the interest payments become unsustainable. As for paying down the principal itself, though…)

3. Although the less accommodative monetary policy this year may materially affect credit conditions — whether interest rates can actually rise given the amount of leverage in the system is another discussion for another day — the very elevated cost of living makes the the $200k to $400k that associates are paid at any market-paying firm feel like it's not a great deal of money. As has been correctly pointed out earlier, it really is: an associate at any market-paying firm is in the top 1% of his/her income bracket for his/her age group. Towards the very bottom of that 1% threshold, to be sure, but nevertheless above it. When a real adjustment happens in the economy, lawyers will feel much wealthier than they do right now vis-à-vis the people in industries where that excess liquidity/speculative capital has concentrated (i.e., technology).

4. If you're really worried about the ROI for your law school education, consider working at a market-paying firm in Texas or Chicago. It is nonsensical that compensation in e.g., Houston is the same as in Manhattan/California right now. Perhaps not ideal places to live for some, but it's financially sensible if you want to rapidly pay off your loans and earn enough money to buy a house and live comfortably. (Don't think for a second, though, that cheap credit is not the culprit for the housing market trends in those locales as well: Houston property prices have risen 25-40% over the past few years despite widespread job losses in the oil and gas sector and a generally poor long-term outlook.)

5. The comments earlier about the number of students at e.g., HLS/CLS/NYU who are just doing the degree to have something legitimate to their peer group to do during the day isn't false. There's a lot of kids from families with a net worth of $10MM or higher. A lot.

[Anonymous User]

The reason law school transparency exists is because schools marketed falsely and fraudulently the starting salaries of their grads. They completely broke trust with their students. They only agreed to give out accurate information in the face of a good deal of pressure, including proposed congrsssional hearings.

As far as I know, no undergrad anthropology advertises career outcomes and salaries.

If you want to justify the cost of law school because all schools and all degrees are expensive, thats ridiculous.

This is Npret. I hit anon by error.

[Npret]

1. It's only due to prevailing central bank policy since the global financial crisis that the cost of living in California/New York has been as elevated as it is. The macroeconomic conditions of the past few years are decidedly abnormal; there has been excess liquidity in the system due to low interest rates and especially quantitative easing, and that excess liquidity is most conspicuous in any place where the local economy is tied to financial asset prices (i.e., stocks; bonds). While there are many wealthy individuals in any large American city who have benefited from central bank policy, the most notable are Manhattan and Northern California. (I mention Manhattan because, although wealthy, Westchester County, N.Y., Long Island, N.Y., and Greenwich, Conn. are by and large not doing well these days.) Accordingly, rent for a renovated, proper one-bedroom apartment in either place has risen to ~$4,000/month. And if you're looking to buy, well, God help you: https://www.zillow.com/homes/recently_s ... ect/13_zm/

2. Excess liquidity in the system/government-backed cheap credit has also permitted law schools to consistently raise tuition at 3-6% a year despite harsh prospects in a stagnating industry. (After all, what is 3.5% annual interest on $300k or even $400k of student loan debt? Given starting salaries, tuition could go up much more before the interest payments become unsustainable. As for paying down the principal itself, though…)

3. Although the less accommodative monetary policy this year may materially affect credit conditions — whether interest rates can actually rise given the amount of leverage in the system is another discussion for another day — the very elevated cost of living makes the the $200k to $400k that associates are paid at any market-paying firm feel like it's not a great deal of money. As has been correctly pointed out earlier, it really is: an associate at any market-paying firm is in the top 1% of his/her income bracket for his/her age group. Towards the very bottom of that 1% threshold, to be sure, but nevertheless above it. When a real adjustment happens in the economy, lawyers will feel much wealthier than they do right now vis-à-vis the people in industries where that excess liquidity/speculative capital has concentrated (i.e., technology).

4. If you're really worried about the ROI for your law school education, consider working at a market-paying firm in Texas or Chicago. It is nonsensical that compensation in e.g., Houston is the same as in Manhattan/California right now. Perhaps not ideal places to live for some, but it's financially sensible if you want to rapidly pay off your loans and earn enough money to buy a house and live comfortably. (Don't think for a second, though, that cheap credit is not the culprit for the housing market trends in those locales as well: Houston property prices have risen 25-40% over the past few years despite widespread job losses in the oil and gas sector and a generally poor long-term outlook.)

5. The comments earlier about the number of students at e.g., HLS/CLS/NYU who are just doing the degree to have something legitimate to their peer group to do during the day isn't false. There's a lot of kids from families with a net worth of $10MM or higher. A lot.

There hasn’t been a good study of the long term prospects for lawyers. I can think of a number of classmates and people from my firm who aren’t even in law anymore. It’s a huge crapshoot, which maybe people understand, but it doesn’t seem like it. People have bad days on exams, interview poorly, study incorrectly, etc.

No one is saying that a Biglaw salary in a vacuum isn’t a lot of money for a 20something to earn. The question the OP asked is if it’s worth it, which implies a valid concern about the cost and the years invested. When you make 6 figures but your net worth is a negative $200,000 or so - you have a long climb back to even. Ignoring your debt may be ok for some, but it’s not exactly responsible or prudent decision making. It’s only easier now because of changes to repayment plans, but you still have to pay it back, there’s virtually no escape from student loan debt.

As far as getting jobs in Texas or elsewhere, it’s not that simple without ties. Grads end up in New York because that is where most of the Biglaw jobs are located and it’s the least tie sensitive place I know, maybe DC is the least ties sensitive, but New York is the easiest place to get a Biglaw job, without question.

If the tuition cost is meaningless to someone financially, and law school is just a credential for their family to be proud, that’s a different consideration. Very, very few people with inpedpendent wealth go to Biglaw or, if they do, stay more than a few years.

By the way, I grew up in New York, the rent was always too damn high.

[Anonymous User]

The reason law school transparency exists is because schools marketed falsely and fraudulently the starting salaries of their grads. They completely broke trust with their students. They only agreed to give out accurate information in the face of a good deal of pressure, including proposed congrsssional hearings.

As far as I know, no undergrad anthropology advertises career outcomes and salaries.

If you want to justify the cost of law school because all schools and all degrees are expensive, thats ridiculous.

This is Npret. I hit anon by error.

Liberal arts and social science programs cite employment statistics, often times incomplete or mention how many CEOs/Executives have Liberal Arts degrees or the many available jobs all the time. The university I attended cited starting salaries for grads and even at age 18 as a freshman, I knew it was incomplete/misrepresented.

[Npret]

The reason law school transparency exists is because schools marketed falsely and fraudulently the starting salaries of their grads. They completely broke trust with their students. They only agreed to give out accurate information in the face of a good deal of pressure, including proposed congrsssional hearings.

As far as I know, no undergrad anthropology advertises career outcomes and salaries.

If you want to justify the cost of law school because all schools and all degrees are expensive, thats ridiculous.

This is Npret. I hit anon by error.

Liberal arts and social science programs cite employment statistics, often times incomplete or mention how many CEOs/Executives have Liberal Arts degrees or the many available jobs all the time. The university I attended cited starting salaries for grads and even at age 18 as a freshman, I knew it was incomplete/misrepresented.

I’ve never seen that, though it doesn’t surprise me. That doesn’t negate the dire need that forced independent third parties to compile truthful statistics about employment in law.

I think you are right about people not expecting it to happen to them, so they ignore the downside risk. I’ve never understood that thinking- there are so many jobs in the world and so many opportunities, that it’s crazy to me people can only see law as an option, and then they only choose it for the money (speaking generally of course. My background is also different- I had money to pay for school, lived at home and it cost a lot less 10 years ago. All I can say is no one in my family or my wife’s family would have supported me taking on 6 figures of debt in exchange for Biglaw. Graduating without debt is completely different.

As far as other jobs, maybe I’m lucky I live In New York and have friends doing all kinds of interesting and fulfilling work that allows them to have fulfilling lives as well. Some make a lot of money, some have family money and some just do what they love. As you mentioned anthropology, my sister studied that, paid nothing and got a PhD doing incredibly fascinating work that took her all over the world. She has a real job. My mom even got a cheap masters degree in environmental education from the Bronx zoo and Miami university and she’s actually going to do research in the Galapagos and Australia. Another friend writes music for virtual reality games. I have friends that are bartenders and servers and they make enough money to live and then take off for Mexico to work in the winter and they have jobs when they come back. Another girl is a professional artist making a very substantial living in NYC. One of my good friends is a full time twitch streamer; another does entertainment videos on YouTube. Even my younger sister (a piano and English major) has written and directed a pilot that has an excellent shot of being a web series. Even my cousin in accounting in big 4 and my other cousin in real estate brokerage firm here in the city (she was a liberal arts student who went to State school in New Jersey) make great money, have supportive teams and don’t work 24/7.

There are many great jobs out there. Law school is just an easy choice.

I think for many people it’s maybe coming from limited backgrounds in small towns or lack of imagination, I don’t know. I can say there are thousands of jobs that can make you happy and provide a reasonable life style. Taking on huge debt isn’t worth it, no way I would have gone if it wasn’t basically free.

[nealric]

4. If you're really worried about the ROI for your law school education, consider working at a market-paying firm in Texas or Chicago. It is nonsensical that compensation in e.g., Houston is the same as in Manhattan/California right now. Perhaps not ideal places to live for some, but it's financially sensible if you want to rapidly pay off your loans and earn enough money to buy a house and live comfortably. (Don't think for a second, though, that cheap credit is not the culprit for the housing market trends in those locales as well: Houston property prices have risen 25-40% over the past few years despite widespread job losses in the oil and gas sector and a generally poor long-term outlook.)

It's not entirely true that compensation in Texas is the same as NYC. While the headline first year starting salaries are the same, many firms in Texas don't really match all the way through to the senior associate level (either in bonus, salary, or both). Partner compensation tends to be lower as well.

[Npret]

4. If you're really worried about the ROI for your law school education, consider working at a market-paying firm in Texas or Chicago. It is nonsensical that compensation in e.g., Houston is the same as in Manhattan/California right now. Perhaps not ideal places to live for some, but it's financially sensible if you want to rapidly pay off your loans and earn enough money to buy a house and live comfortably. (Don't think for a second, though, that cheap credit is not the culprit for the housing market trends in those locales as well: Houston property prices have risen 25-40% over the past few years despite widespread job losses in the oil and gas sector and a generally poor long-term outlook.)

It's not entirely true that compensation in Texas is the same as NYC. While the headline first year starting salaries are the same, many firms in Texas don't really match all the way through to the senior associate level (either in bonus, salary, or both). Partner compensation tends to be lower as well.

That’s a good point I didn’t know. I think I’m right in saying that Texas firms care about ties. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

[smokeylarue]

The doom and gloom in this thread is too much. Yes law school is a shitty decision for most people. Everyone knows there are way too many shitty law schools with terrible employment prospects. This forum is first and foremost for people that do their research and know the risks of law school and are aiming for Biglaw (this seems to have changed in the last few months though, so maybe not true anymore). For people that can get into top law schools and land a Biglaw position (which is the outcome for the majority of people who attend these top law schools), a lot of these people can pretty much guarantee themselves a minimum salary of $150-200k for the rest of their lives (assuming some common route of Biglaw to Inhouse). That is a great financial outcome, and one that does not require ANY skills or intelligence or background whatsoever.

[Npret]

The doom and gloom in this thread is too much. Yes law school is a shitty decision for most people. Everyone knows there are way too many shitty law schools with terrible employment prospects. This forum is first and foremost for people that do their research and know the risks of law school and are aiming for Biglaw (this seems to have changed in the last few months though, so maybe not true anymore). For people that can get into top law schools and land a Biglaw position (which is the outcome for the majority of people who attend these top law schools), a lot of these people can pretty much guarantee themselves a minimum salary of $150-200k for the rest of their lives (assuming some common route of Biglaw to Inhouse). That is a great financial outcome, and one that does not require ANY skills or intelligence or background whatsoever.

I said I’ve never seen a long term study of lawyers salaries. I know people (even CCN grads) for who that isn’t at all true, but it’s all anecdotal.

I feel that most of the 0L posters and lurkers here have no clue about law school, hiring, or a career in biglaw. Most of them can tell you the starting salary and that’s where it ends. If I’m wrong, it doesn’t hurt to educate the people who don’t know what you think “everybody knows.”

[nealric]

4. If you're really worried about the ROI for your law school education, consider working at a market-paying firm in Texas or Chicago. It is nonsensical that compensation in e.g., Houston is the same as in Manhattan/California right now. Perhaps not ideal places to live for some, but it's financially sensible if you want to rapidly pay off your loans and earn enough money to buy a house and live comfortably. (Don't think for a second, though, that cheap credit is not the culprit for the housing market trends in those locales as well: Houston property prices have risen 25-40% over the past few years despite widespread job losses in the oil and gas sector and a generally poor long-term outlook.)

It's not entirely true that compensation in Texas is the same as NYC. While the headline first year starting salaries are the same, many firms in Texas don't really match all the way through to the senior associate level (either in bonus, salary, or both). Partner compensation tends to be lower as well.

That’s a good point I didn’t know. I think I’m right in saying that Texas firms care about ties. Please correct me if I’m wrong.

They do to some extent, but it seems much less than they used to when the Big 3 Texas firms (BB/VE/Fubright) dominated the market. Things have changed a lot in the Texas market even in the last 10 years .

[Anonymous User]

As far as other jobs, maybe I’m lucky I live In New York and have friends doing all kinds of interesting and fulfilling work that allows them to have fulfilling lives as well. Some make a lot of money, some have family money and some just do what they love. As you mentioned anthropology, my sister studied that, paid nothing and got a PhD doing incredibly fascinating work that took her all over the world. She has a real job. My mom even got a cheap masters degree in environmental education from the Bronx zoo and Miami university and she’s actually going to do research in the Galapagos and Australia. Another friend writes music for virtual reality games. I have friends that are bartenders and servers and they make enough money to live and then take off for Mexico to work in the winter and they have jobs when they come back. Another girl is a professional artist making a very substantial living in NYC. One of my good friends is a full time twitch streamer; another does entertainment videos on YouTube. Even my younger sister (a piano and English major) has written and directed a pilot that has an excellent shot of being a web series. Even my cousin in accounting in big 4 and my other cousin in real estate brokerage firm here in the city (she was a liberal arts student who went to State school in New Jersey) make great money, have supportive teams and don’t work 24/7.

Those types of jobs - becoming an anthropologist, writing music for VR games, Youtube partner, or environmentalist requires two things the vast majority of attorneys lack: 1. optomistic long term planning; 2. passion aside from "biglaw $180 salary."

In case you haven't noticed being on TLS or other law forums, they don't exactly draw that type of crowd. Instead, many attorneys, especially the ones on TLS-esque like forums, are extremely resistant to taking risks and generally pessimistic.

Committing to years of studying anthropology or playing music well or stuff like running a good business online - it requires the willingness to work really hard with uncertain returns in the future. I've said it many times on this forum, in order to hit it big, you need to take big risks.

That's not a thing here. People want to see there 70% or 90% placement rate in Biglaw. It's Biglaw $180,000 salaries or bust. Any other outcome like getting a JD and becoming successful at running/owning a business or finding your passion doesn't exist, unless that passion is listed and ranked on Vault/US News. Or it's a clerkship that leads to biglaw.

Your friends are just more intelligent and have actual passions. It's a bad comparison. I'm guessing they'd never hangout or want to have a convo longer than 10 minutes with some of the lifers on some of these forums (this one actually gotten much better since some of the lifers left). Many of the successful entrepreneurs I know, engineers, startup founders, artists - you think they like talking to most attorneys when they don't have to?

I'm guessing your successful buddies don't start law forums ranking the "t14 online video website for entertainers" or the Vault 100 of most successful environmentalists and make their career decisions based on that. Just like I'm guessing Marc Jacobs isn't sitting there wondering whether he or Tom Ford is ranked higher on lists no one reads.

Yeah, when you have passion, plan well, and do great work people see the enthusiasm and money will come. You've just preaching to the wrong crowd. You're trying to sell a Christina Aguilera album at a Marilyn Manson concert.