How rich can you get in big law? Forum

[laotze]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

[UVAIce]

That all depends on your personal situation and it's something you should think about before going to law school. But yes, if you decide to attend law school and take out $250,000 in student loans then you won't exactly be living high on the hog on a salary of $160,000 a year.

[UVAIce]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

This is just stupid. You want to alter salary statistics in the United States just for lawyers? Not to mention that the utility of this statistic is not to determine the purchasing power of newly minted lawyers who also took on a mind boggling amount of debt. It's just there to show what people get paid. Guess what, lot's of other fields have this exact same problem for entry level folks at the moment.

[guano]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

Then you should also distinguish by location. $100k in NYC is chump change, while $100k in Alabama is fandabulous

[laotze]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

This is just stupid. You want to alter salary statistics in the United States just for lawyers?

No, and I said nothing about that. I'm talking about off-the-cuff street definitions of wealth, not altering the fucking BLS metrics for income reporting.

Besides, even statistically speaking, anyone who sees a young lawyer on the street and assumes they are making >$100k is an idiot, given that the BLS-reported median is reflective of everyone in the field (i.e. partners and all lawyers who secured their positions prior to the market crash), and is still only $112,750/year.

Guess what, lot's of other fields have this exact same problem for entry level folks at the moment.

No shit, Sherlock; that's a pretty natural expansion of my observation. But way to be a condescending douche about your faulty assumptions.

[laotze]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

Then you should also distinguish by location. $100k in NYC is chump change, while $100k in Alabama is fandabulous

...remaining UG debt and their city COL.

[guano]

Just making six figures puts you in the top 7% of salaries. Maybe not rich but certainly a substantial income in your 20s.

There really should be a positive net worth requirement for this standard. I would never assume a recent law graduate was "rich" even if employed in biglaw, given the number of them walking around with >$200k debt that will likely take at least the first half decade of their career to pay off, maybe the whole damn decade depending on remaining UG debt and their city COL.

This is just stupid. You want to alter salary statistics in the United States just for lawyers?

No, and I said nothing about that. I'm talking about off-the-cuff street definitions of wealth, not altering the fucking BLS metrics for income reporting.

Besides, even statistically speaking, anyone who sees a young lawyer on the street and assumes they are making >$100k is an idiot, given that the BLS-reported median is reflective of everyone in the field (i.e. partners and all lawyers who secured their positions prior to the market crash), and is still only $112,750/year.

Guess what, lot's of other fields have this exact same problem for entry level folks at the moment.

No shit, Sherlock; that's a pretty natural expansion of my observation. But way to be a condescending douche about your faulty assumptions.

I think it's safe to assume that anyone working for a large law firm (in a real capacity) is, or should be, rich. I'm willing to exempt 1st to 3rd years

[Homelandsagreatshow]

^First through third years make up a rather large percentage of big firm lawyers though don't they? Up or out syndrome?

[laotze]

I think it's safe to assume that anyone working for a large law firm (in a real capacity) is, or should be, rich. I'm willing to exempt 1st to 3rd years

Makes sense if you can see their Cravath briefcase I suppose. But let's not forget what a small percentage (~15% at my last check) of practicing lawyers actually work in biglaw

[guano]

^First through third years make up a rather large percentage of big firm lawyers though don't they? Up or out syndrome?

It's not just up or out. A lot of people can't hack the lifestyle.

It's one thing yo know you'll be working 100 hour weeks, it's another thing to actually be doing it.

[guano]

I think it's safe to assume that anyone working for a large law firm (in a real capacity) is, or should be, rich. I'm willing to exempt 1st to 3rd years

Makes sense if you can see their Cravath briefcase I suppose. But let's not forget what a small percentage (~15% at my last check) of practicing lawyers actually work in biglaw

I wasn't referring to anyone else.

I believe every aspiring law student should watch the first 15 minutes of The Verdict

[UVAIce]

I think it's safe to assume that anyone working for a large law firm (in a real capacity) is, or should be, rich. I'm willing to exempt 1st to 3rd years

Makes sense if you can see their Cravath briefcase I suppose. But let's not forget what a small percentage (~15% at my last check) of practicing lawyers actually work in biglaw

I was Angry; I redact my statements.

[lukertin]

You can become a millionaire.

[GodGivesMe4.0]

At what year do most people hit the 300k mark?