<p>Is it possible for a, say, HLS grad working at a top Law Firm like Watchell, Lipten to make the same amount of money after 5 years as a HBS grad working at a top I-Bank like Goldman?</p>
<p>Few first-year associates at Wachtell will be there after five years. Few Goldman hires will be there after five years.</p>
<p>Frankly, if you're going to be working virtually all of your waking hours, it makes more sense to choose a line of work that's marginally more suitable to your interests, as opposed to choosing work that enables you to earn marginally more money that you have no time to spend.</p>
<p>Why would you say that few associates would still be there after five years at both prestigious firms? I don't know much about Goldman, but from what I've read, Wachtell hires associates with the fact that they would like them to eventually become partners in mind and that being hired by them pretty much guarrentees you a spot as partner if you choose to continue.</p>
<p>and where did you read that? their own publicity? and what do they mean my "if you choose to continue"? </p>
<p>i don't know about wachtell per se, but i would advise a healthier dose of skepticism.</p>
<p>back in the olden days when i was in law school, a good test of this type of hype was to go and look at old copies of Martindale Hubell - and look how many people are REALLY still around over time - i know they're on-line these days - can you still look at old hard copies? and do large firms even bother to list associates these days?</p>
<p>anyway - when i was in law school (many years ago) - there were generally two types of large law firms - those that made it very clear that they didn't expect most associates to make partner, but claimed they offered great training none the less, and those that said they weren't like "those other firms" and they really "hoped" every associate stayed to make partner. well you know what - even at most of those firms that claimed they were "different", most associates in an entering class weren't around when partnership judgement day arrived - the firms always had reasons why this was so - the associates just "chose" to go elsewhere. but you have to really ask why that was - in many cases it wasn't completely free will and in many cases it was a realization that the price for trying to make partner was simply too high.</p>
<p>Elliot Spitzer......that is a question. What is the propensity of employment to continue in Law v Wall Street??</p>