<p>I don’t think what we are saying is that different. If you cut your losses after the first year, you certainly won’t have $200,000 in non-dischargeable debt. If you have to take on $200,000 to attend a T14, you should look at your top state/regional school where tuition is half or, as you suggest, you get considerable money to attend. </p>
<p>While law school tuition is exorbitant from when I attended, so are starting salaries at major firms. Again, the key is that you have to do well wherever you go. With so many law schools these days cranking out attorneys, you want to be at the best school you can afford and in at least the top quartile of the class. Again, class rank is a bit of a sliding scale depending on the school, but I wouldn’t count on getting a choice job if I were in the middle to bottom of the class almost anywhere.</p>
<p>That’s probably true, but I suspect if you do the math, you will discover that law school tuition has outpaced BIGLAW starting salaries by quite a bit. Especially if you look at take-home pay.</p>
<p>Obviously, “take home pay” is a function of where one practices. Bottom line is, as the ABA has recently counseled prospective law students, each individual student needs to do their own math to see if and/or where they should attend law school. Taking on considerable debt to pay sticker price at a law school is only going to make sense if you are clearly Big Law potential. You know that by the end of your first year.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what your point is here. Even if you work for BIGLAW in a jurisdiction with no state or local income taxes, you will still pay more taxes on the second 80k you earn in a year than on the first 80k. This has been true for many decades. </p>
<p>Thus, a doubling in gross BIGLAW salaries between 1991 and 2011 is less than a doubling in net pay after taxes – anywhere in the US. Meanwhile, law school tuition has more than doubled in that time.</p>
<p>The upshot is that law school is a significantly worse deal now than it was 20 years ago, even just looking at BIGLAW salaries.</p>
<p>Perhaps a bigger problem is the fact that attorney salaries outside of BIGLAW have emphatically not doubled between 1991 and 2011. Of course a high percentage of BIGLAW associates leave after a few years for lower paying jobs. Either they are fired; eased out; or quit due to the misery of working in BIGLAW. From this perspective, law school is a far worse deal now than it was 20 years ago.</p>
<p>I agree. I would add that the math has changed considerably over the last 20 years. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I basically agree, except I would add that even with BIGLAW there is still a decent amount of risk. With a BIGLAW position, it should be no problem to make $2200 a month student loan payments. But if you get laid off; or fired; or sick of BIGLAW, it will become a huge albatross around your neck.</p>
<p>I’m not trying to argue with you. My point, obviously, is that your actual take home pay is higher (nothing to do with the rate of taxation) if you are practicing in a state with no state or local income taxes/ a lower cost of living. Accordingly, you have more funds with which to pay down any student debt. My personal opinion is that no one should be taking on that kind of six figure debt you suggested is common in an earlier post for the very reasons you state. Even assuming you land a Big Law job (i.e., you are in at least the top quartile of your class), who knows how long you will be able to keep it? I can’t tell you how many kids I saw at about the three year mark who decided for a variety of reasons to leave the firm. Many Big Law firms have institutionalized 2/5 year reviews for associates, so you may be out after only two years of big bucks. The recent ABA article lays it all out pretty clearly in terms of ROI for a law school degree these days, essentially agreeing with your conclusion.</p>
<p>would a graduate who was from a T14 school being in the bottom half of the class be able to get a decent non-law job with a higher salary before their law degree?
They only wanted the law degree to boost their credentials in the non-law job.</p>
<p>This is a more difficult proposition than many would like. Anything is possible, but this is typically not a probable proposition. Most employers outside legal are going to value two additional years of real experience far more than they’ll value a JD. </p>
<p>I’m not saying one won’t get a position, but it’s very unlikely to be significantly better or higher paying–the later being particularly important given the now significant additional debt likely being carried.</p>
<p>I doubt it, since the law degree will stigmatize the person as someone who couldn’t find a job or who couldn’t make up his mind or someone who will bail as soon as he finds something better.</p>
<p>The problem is that this math is almost impossible to do, since the employment info from the schools is unreliable and you can’t really predict what your grades will be. If you get shut out during OCI, you may decide to cut your losses, but that can leave you with $60K+ in debt, struggling to get an entry level job that will pay maybe $40K if you’re lucky.</p>
<p>I understand that the law is really been saturated but is this true in all fields of law? For instance if someone wanted to specialize in international law is this also saturated? And are there any growing fields?</p>
<p>I am not aware of any areas in which jobs are growing. Traditionally, practices track society’s needs. When the economy is very bad, bankruptcy lawyers do better. In the days when Silicone Valley was King, IP and licensing lawyers were busy. When the economy was great, mergers & acquisitions lawyers had work. At times, oil & gas lawyers have been busy. At other times, they have been nearly unemployable (I remember the crash…). Right now I believe that energy lawyers are doing ok. Patent and tax lawyers generally are stable throughout. Health care law was viewed as being hot a few years ago as a result of health care reform, but I don’t think that the expected jobs ever materialized. The same bump in interest in education law occurred when there was educational reform a few years ago. Real estate lawyers may be coming out of a slump. There was a boost to employment lawyers when ADA and FMLA were implemented.</p>
<p>I think it’s interesting when law schools jump on trends to offer “certificates” in a field. In my view, it can be dangerous to identify yourself as wanting to specialize by earning a certificate in such a poor job market. It could limit opportunities that might be available to get interviews for positions for other types of legal work.</p>
<p>From my perspective, all of this means that existing lawyers are positioned well to keep working - even in my industry (which is warming up right now), the market is still saturated and the companies still have hiring freezes.</p>
<p>Just out of curiosity - does anyone actually find my posts useful? My last kid is now in college and my oldest kid is well-along in law school. I’m thinking about moving on from CC.</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen, the sectors that were least-saturated (which is not quite the same as growing) were health and IP.</p>
<p>International law is almost always saturated, because there’s actually very few jobs in the area and tons and tons and tons of law students find it appealing. Even in boom times, international law (to whatever extent it exists at all) is usually quite saturated.</p>
<p>Right now, even an Econ MA (or MBA for those with work experience) at a strong school sounds like a better investment than a JD. Plus you only lose one year (or 2 at most), which gives you plenty of time to take advantage of a strong economy.</p>
<p>Don’t go to a law school unless you get T-14, or get near full rides from schools ranked lower. I’d still say a top 10 law school is worth attending paying sticker, considering good enough of employment prospects. Lower T-14, such as Cornell or Georgetown, paying sticker, may be a bit of a gamble. I think the worst case scenario is attending a semi-top, non-T14 law school paying sticker. (think: Boston College, Emory, Fordham, GWU, etc) You don’t have very good BigLaw chances, yet your classmates are pretty smart and all gunning for BigLaw.</p>
<p>That doesn’t make sense? “Go to a T-14 unless you can go somewhere else for free?” I thought if I didn’t go to Harvard I was going to end up washing floors?</p>
<p>I would say it depends. If you really want to be an attorney and you graduate law school without any debt, you have a lot of options which others lack. For example you can take a low paying legal job and work your way up. Or you can start your own practice. Or you might actually find a decent paying job.</p>