General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools? Forum

(Please Ask Questions and Answer Questions)
User avatar
sublime

Diamond
Posts: 17385
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by sublime » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:26 pm

..

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:37 pm

OK, let's try this again. A generic, crude, conservative rule of thumb to determine whether your debt load is very safe:

LST Score > 85 + Large/FedClerk Score > 70 = Any debt within reason (HYS)
LST Score > 80 + Large/FedClerk Score > 50 = 160K debt (T13-4)
LST Score > 70 + Large/FedClerk Score > 30 = 50-70K debt (Strong Regionals)
LST Score > 60 + Large/FedClerk Score > 10 = 20-40K debt (Regionals)
LST Score < 60 + Large/FedClerk Score < 10 = No debt (TTT)

User avatar
sublime

Diamond
Posts: 17385
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 12:21 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by sublime » Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:41 pm

..

AJS915

New
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by AJS915 » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:07 pm

Out of curiosity, why factor in federal clerkship chances at all? A year of relatively low income while the interest accumulates hardly seems like it justifies itself on finances alone. Of course, finances aren't the only consideration, but various qualitative and subjective differences are precisely why the cost-benefit analysis can't be generalized, even with reasonable-sounding scales and ranges.

Say your objective is to do transactional work for a firm that pays well enough to pay down that debt we're trying to fit into a CBA. What on earth does a clerkship do for you?

User avatar
A. Nony Mouse

Diamond
Posts: 29293
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 11:51 am

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by A. Nony Mouse » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:10 pm

I think people factor in clerkship chances because most people who do federal clerkships have the qualifications to get biglaw, and many (most?) go on to work in biglaw after the clerkship. So they're a proxy for additional biglaw jobs, not an end in themselves.

Whether they make sense for people interested in transactional jobs is a whole other issue, but not really relevant to why they get counted as they do.

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


User avatar
John Everyman

Silver
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:20 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by John Everyman » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:11 pm

AJS915 wrote:Out of curiosity, why factor in federal clerkship chances at all? A year of relatively low income while the interest accumulates hardly seems like it justifies itself on finances alone. Of course, finances aren't the only consideration, but various qualitative and subjective differences are precisely why the cost-benefit analysis can't be generalized, even with reasonable-sounding scales and ranges.

Say your objective is to do transactional work for a firm that pays well enough to pay down that debt we're trying to fit into a CBA. What on earth does a clerkship do for you?
Just try not to take one when they're handing them out then, it's tough, but if your quick enough you can dodge most of the less nimble judges.

JustHawkin

Gold
Posts: 1798
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 10:54 am

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by JustHawkin » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:28 pm

John Everyman wrote:Just try not to take one when they're handing them out then, it's tough, but if your quick enough you can dodge most of the less nimble judges.
LOL'ed

User avatar
SFrost

Bronze
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by SFrost » Wed Apr 09, 2014 4:56 pm

There's something very bizarre about people saying $0 debt. Are you just not counting cost of living?

A TTT isn't the best option but it's certifiably better than a lot of employment outcomes for liberal arts majors. Even doc review or PD may be better / more exciting than a bag boy at the supermarket.

$50,000 debt is A) Perfectly serviceable with just about any income and B) a reasonable cost for a J.D. from a local school.

Are you suggesting people only attend lower ranked schools with full rides and money in the bank to cover 3 years of living? That doesn't make sense if someone wants to, for example, get into PD.

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:20 pm

SFrost wrote:Are you suggesting people only attend lower ranked schools with full rides and money in the bank to cover 3 years of living?
If by "lower ranked schools" you mean schools that employ less than/about half of their graduates as lawyers, then yep, that's correct.

Why can't hypothetical PD retake and go to x state flagship for 50K in debt, instead of dumpster fire?

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


californiauser

Silver
Posts: 1213
Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2012 1:10 am

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by californiauser » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:39 pm

SFrost wrote:There's something very bizarre about people saying $0 debt. Are you just not counting cost of living?

A TTT isn't the best option but it's certifiably better than a lot of employment outcomes for liberal arts majors. Even doc review or PD may be better / more exciting than a bag boy at the supermarket.

$50,000 debt is A) Perfectly serviceable with just about any income and B) a reasonable cost for a J.D. from a local school.

Are you suggesting people only attend lower ranked schools with full rides and money in the bank to cover 3 years of living? That doesn't make sense if someone wants to, for example, get into PD.
50k isn't worth a 50% (or worse in some cases) chance of becoming a temporary sh*tlawyer or doc review, especially in a city with high COL

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:42 pm

SFrost wrote:A TTT isn't the best option but it's certifiably better than a lot of employment outcomes for liberal arts majors. Even doc review or PD may be better / more exciting than a bag boy at the supermarket.
Sure, that's still a really bad way to look at this though. Liberal arts grad should go to a tech school for two years and five grand instead. Much better option than doc review and 50K in the hole.
SFrost wrote: $50,000 debt is A) Perfectly serviceable with just about any income and B) a reasonable cost for a J.D. from a local school.
This is absurd.

JMC562

New
Posts: 6
Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 1:53 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by JMC562 » Wed Apr 09, 2014 5:45 pm

The truth is most of these answers are crap because none of us no what your goals are for employment (regional, New York, Big Law, Clerkship, etc). If you are very ambitious and wanna play it safe, then probably only a handful of the T14 are worth it full sticker. The rest would require a decent scholly depending on your goals. Personally, I think going to a school outside T14/20 is legit on a full ride if it is a respected school in a specific region you are looking to work.

I know this is vague, but it really depends on you.

User avatar
Balthy

Silver
Posts: 665
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by Balthy » Wed Apr 09, 2014 6:45 pm

Will_McAvoy wrote:OK, let's try this again. A generic, crude, conservative rule of thumb to determine whether your debt load is very safe:

LST Score > 85 + Large/FedClerk Score > 70 = Any debt within reason (HYS)
LST Score > 80 + Large/FedClerk Score > 50 = 160K debt (T13-4)
LST Score > 70 + Large/FedClerk Score > 30 = 50-70K debt (Strong Regionals)
LST Score > 60 + Large/FedClerk Score > 10 = 20-40K debt (Regionals)
LST Score < 60 + Large/FedClerk Score < 10 = No debt (TTT)

The only thing i don't understand about this is the schools you put in the parentheses. Chicago and CLS meet the criteria you defined for the first group, but you think they should still be in the second? That seems like a pretty common opinion on TLS.. just wondering why.

Register now!

Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.

It's still FREE!


User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Wed Apr 09, 2014 7:46 pm

Balthy wrote: The only thing i don't understand about this is the schools you put in the parentheses. Chicago and CLS meet the criteria you defined for the first group, but you think they should still be in the second? That seems like a pretty common opinion on TLS.. just wondering why.
Because I didn't know that, because I'm not smart enough to get into those school and haven't checked out their LST numbers. I was just crudely defining the tiers, which was probably unnecessary.

User avatar
SFrost

Bronze
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by SFrost » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:06 pm

Will_McAvoy wrote:
SFrost wrote:Are you suggesting people only attend lower ranked schools with full rides and money in the bank to cover 3 years of living?
If by "lower ranked schools" you mean schools that employ less than/about half of their graduates as lawyers, then yep, that's correct.

Why can't hypothetical PD retake and go to x state flagship for 50K in debt, instead of dumpster fire?
You have some kind of bizarre, elitist, naive attitude about the legal profession. Not everyone is going to be a high powered Manhattan lawyer or Supreme Court clerk.

Believe it or not, there are actually people out there who WANT to get a job at the local public defender's office. There are people who actually prefer doc review to bagging groceries. I know a person who was a secretary at the local PD and basically had a guaranteed job lined up after law school. Should they go prestige crazy just to end up at the same job?

Even with $100,000 a debt, a person at retail will pay less than $150 per month on their loan (or even $0, I do know several people with kids paying $0).

TLS needs to get a more realistic understanding of what the MAJORITY of the legal profession is, which is lower middle class work.

rad lulz

Platinum
Posts: 9807
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2012 10:53 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by rad lulz » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:08 pm

l
Last edited by rad lulz on Fri Sep 02, 2016 12:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:23 pm

.
Last edited by McAvoy on Fri Apr 18, 2014 3:18 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Get unlimited access to all forums and topics

Register now!

I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...


User avatar
SFrost

Bronze
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by SFrost » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:25 pm

rad lulz wrote: It's like the entirety of 3 years of work on fighting the law school scam by campos, LST, et al just passed you by
And for some reason you've translated the law school scam to the complete absence of local placement.

Go to Harvard and try to get a job at a small PD office. They'll assume you murdered your professor or had a mental breakdown. Just the same as a "bad" law school can underqualify you for a top job, a good law school can overqualify you for many jobs.

And this is the part where I question your knowledge of the economy as a whole: MOST fields are having problems. People are working shit jobs everywhere for shit pay. Even TTT graduates are placing large numbers of people into relatively comfortable jobs. 50k/year for someone in their 20s is a damn good outcome for a lot of people.

I say this as someone coming from a science PhD where 30-year-olds with rigorous training, who are overqualified for 99% of jobs, dream of landing a 50k/year job.

Mal Reynolds

Diamond
Posts: 12612
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by Mal Reynolds » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:28 pm

SFrost wrote:
rad lulz wrote: It's like the entirety of 3 years of work on fighting the law school scam by campos, LST, et al just passed you by
And for some reason you've translated the law school scam to the complete absence of local placement.

Go to Harvard and try to get a job at a small PD office. They'll assume you murdered your professor or had a mental breakdown. Just the same as a "bad" law school can underqualify you for a top job, a good law school can overqualify you for many jobs.

And this is the part where I question your knowledge of the economy as a whole: MOST fields are having problems. People are working shit jobs everywhere for shit pay. Even TTT graduates are placing large numbers of people into relatively comfortable jobs. 50k/year for someone in their 20s is a damn good outcome for a lot of people.

I say this as someone coming from a science PhD where 30-year-olds with rigorous training, who are overqualified for 99% of jobs, dream of landing a 50k/year job.
Of COURSE a phd is defending his decision to remain in school for another three years.

User avatar
SFrost

Bronze
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by SFrost » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:30 pm

This thread is highlighting the complete lack of real world experience by many on TLS and the privileged middle class backgrounds many come from.

Fact is, a lot of people lack the ability and/or motivation to produce a strong law school application. For the same reason that not everyone goes to a top B school or the best medical school or the best undergrad institution, it takes all kinds. There are a lot of jobs out there for middling law graduates and 50k really isn't that much for someone to take an informed risk on.

The law school SCAM comes from schools like Cooley taking entire first years of tuition from students who have no chance of making it to 2L. The scam comes from schools endlessly raising tuition in the absence of better employment outcomes. Full rides to 90% of law schools (with 50k of debt-financed COL) are reasonable options for many students.

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:32 pm

SFrost wrote:There are a lot of jobs out there for middling law graduates and 50k really isn't that much for someone to take an informed risk on.
Where? Please show us. Please stop spouting this shit -- it's nonsense.

Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.

Register now, it's still FREE!


User avatar
John Everyman

Silver
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Dec 11, 2013 2:20 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by John Everyman » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:47 pm

Will_McAvoy wrote:
SFrost wrote:You have some kind of bizarre, elitist, naive attitude about the legal profession. Not everyone is going to be a high powered Manhattan lawyer or Supreme Court clerk.
What the hell are you talking about? Obviously. There are dozens upon dozens of completely unnecessary law schools that serve no purpose. 40 percent of graduates every year cannot get a job as a lawyer because of it.
SFrost wrote:Believe it or not, there are actually people out there who WANT to get a job at the local public defender's office. There are people who actually prefer doc review to bagging groceries. I know a person who was a secretary at the local PD and basically had a guaranteed job lined up after law school. Should they go prestige crazy just to end up at the same job?
I want to be a PD, asshole. There are too many law schools and too many people trying to be lawyers. If you can't get into your state flagship, you probably shouldn't go to law school.
SFrost wrote:Even with $100,000 a debt, a person at retail will pay less than $150 per month on their loan (or even $0, I do know several people with kids paying $0).
Again, one of the dumber things I've read on this forum.
SFrost wrote:TLS needs to get a more realistic understanding of what the MAJORITY of the legal profession is, which is lower middle class work.
Go read the freaking vale. You don't know what you're talking about, and you would be punished eternally for encouraging people to go to TTTT dumpster fires (and take out 100k for it!), if it were a just universe.
Dude, you're a 0L, why are you so mad all the time. I feel like I'm going to have a heart attack just reading your posts.

If the guy doesn't get it, then he's an obscenely successful troll, either way, the point has been made.

User avatar
SFrost

Bronze
Posts: 373
Joined: Thu Jan 16, 2014 3:32 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by SFrost » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:51 pm

My prediction for a lot of T14 or bust: they'll get decent jobs but still won't be happy because they expected TV-level power and money. Then, they'll see some Barry Law graduate working a steady 9-5 for decent middle class income who's happy and be mad at the injustice of it all. Doesn't that Barry graduate know he went to a scam school!!! He needs to be miserable, right now!!

Mal Reynolds

Diamond
Posts: 12612
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 12:16 am

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by Mal Reynolds » Thu Apr 10, 2014 5:58 pm

SFrost wrote:My prediction for a lot of T14 or bust: they'll get decent jobs but still won't be happy because they expected TV-level power and money. Then, they'll see some Barry Law graduate working a steady 9-5 for decent middle class income who's happy and be mad at the injustice of it all. Doesn't that Barry graduate know he went to a scam school!!! He needs to be miserable, right now!!
lol

User avatar
McAvoy

Gold
Posts: 1584
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2013 10:33 pm

Re: General consensus on cost benefit analysis for law schools?

Post by McAvoy » Thu Apr 10, 2014 6:01 pm

.
Last edited by McAvoy on Fri Apr 18, 2014 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Seriously? What are you waiting for?

Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!


Post Reply

Return to “Ask a Law Student”