<p>I think it's really a question of expected value. Your EV is higher if you get good grades. Then again, your grades and schooling are only like 2 or 3 lines on your resume. What you actually do matters way more.</p>
<p>Actually, my EV is lower than my suitemate, even though I have better grades than he does, because he'll likely just go into IB and I'll go to law school and become a lawyer. But theoretically, if we were to both become lawyers, or both do IB, I would theoretically have a higher EV.</p>
<p>Isn't IB hard to get into or something?</p>
<p>Probably. But getting into (and THROUGH) top5 law school with a good enough class rank (read: top half or third) that'll have law firms banging down your door to give you job offers is no cakewalk either.</p>
<p>Studying for the Bar makes a day in IB look like a picnic. Try cramming 250 years of both federal and state statutory and common law, legal theory/doctrines, and the relationships between the former into your head in the span of, like, 6 weeks. The best part: if you don't pass the bar, you may very well get fired (law firms hire you before you graduate i.e. before you take the bar), and until you pass the bar, you just flushed $200k down the toilet.</p>
<p>Then consider an alternate career path if you don't like it. It's not like you're doing the world favor by becoming a lawyer.</p>
<p>I'm not pursuing an alternate path because I'm gonna make less money than an ibanker as a lawyer-90% of the world make less than ibankers. It's normal. Whatever. I'm in the majority. Like I care. But my point is, if some people are turned off by the prospect of becoming a lawyer, of when people look at me funny when I tell them I'm going to become a lawyer, I understand why.</p>
<p>It's one of those things: life's not fair. I understand that. Plus I like studying the law, I find it to be a highly intriguing subject, and I think it's the most multidisciplinary professional degree of the three professional disciplines: business, law and medicine. Business just teaches you to make money. Medicine teaches you to treat people. The law, however, governs ALL THREE disciplines (yes, the law governs lawyers too) and is thus much more complex and interesting than the other two. My only gripe is the almost prohibitive cost of law school (thank god my dad said he'll pay as long as I'm in school.....I guess he'll pay for law school.) and the incredibly dauntingly hard-looking bar exam.</p>
<p>I'm simply pointing out the much lower ROI of a JD vs. an MBA. Yet I'll get a JD because of the intrinsic value that comes with a JD. An MBA is an overpriced headhunter.</p>
<p>The three professional disciplines? Never heard of 'em. Google hasn't either.</p>
<p>"the</a> three professional disciplines" - Google Search</p>
<p>If they do exist, business most certainly is not one of them. An MBA is much easier than Calc I and requires far less study time. I'm laughing as a type this, but it really is true from what I've heard. I would count engineering as a professional discipline long before an MBA. An engineer has to take about 6-8 semesters of really aggravating math. That's good for a JD, and MBA, and several dozen PHd's in women's studies. There's like 2,000,000 engineers in this country, we just forget they exist because there's no TV shows about them because network executives aren't aware of their existence. Also, they want to kill themselves:</p>
<p>When I say that I'm referring to the three commonly known professional degrees-JD, MD, MBA. Although engineering is arguably "professional" I don't know why it's not considered a "professional" degree. Probably because you get a BS, MS, and then PhD in it.</p>
<p>Although a degree in finance is as vocational as it gets, it's not a vocational degree at a lot of schools; you get a BS in finance. Some schools give out BBAs but a professional degree is usually considered a graduate thing.</p>
<p>I consider it a professional degree. What we're seeing here is a class divide. Engineering is too bourgeoisie for you. Someone as immensely rich as you can only really consider such universally lucrative careers like lawyer, doctor, MBA (all from top top top schools of course). You don't consider engineering because even if you do good at it, you'll probably end up making less than your parents unless you're REEEAAALLLY good. For the bourgeoisie, 60k a year is CASH MONEY. For you, it isn't, because you probably already know at this point in your life that you want to send your kids to Harvard.</p>
<p>SHS, you might want to reconsider your choice of schools. While I see some of the same arrogance in your post that others have commented on, there is also a grain of truth to it. If the vast majority of the kids at a U are not at all interested in academics, if the work they are willing to put in is the least it takes to get by, then that will dominate the U. The profs will have to teach to that level because that's what they have to work with. While there are undoubtedly bright students at any U and some say "just hang out with them", if the average student doesn't care then the level of your classes will have to reflect that. And don't forget the power of social ostracism; weaker colleges often give substantial merit aid to better students to attract them, give them some type of "honors" label, etc., but be sure to talk to some of those kids to see if they think overall its been worth it.</p>
<p>In New York, $60k a year is, like, the proletariat. Or maybe the underclass below the proletariat. Making $195k as a lawyer in New York BARELY qualifies for the bourgeoisie. And by the way, my parent's don't make all that much. I'll probably make more starting out of law school than my parents make right now.</p>
<p>There will be people at your school who are more intelligent than you, and are wondering how they're going to deal with you, guaranteed. In life you're not going to end up only working with people who got the same grades you did, and that's something you need to deal with.</p>