<p>Some of the law schools with these programs appear to say they'll repay your loans if you have a public-service job that pays $40,000 or less and work there for ten years. Is that practical? Can you live in a major metro area on that salary, even without the loan payments? I am beginning to understand why people I know chose instead to work in big law for a few years to repay the loans...Surely there is a salary level between $40,000 and big law?</p>
<p>Well, first of all, why do you necessarily have to live in a major metro area? </p>
<p>Secondly, even if you do, the average salary in NYC in 2003 $48k. Clearly that means that a significant percentage of people in NYC are surviving on 40k or less. Hence, it is clearly possible to do. </p>
<p><a href="http://nyjobsource.com/salaries.html%5B/url%5D">http://nyjobsource.com/salaries.html</a></p>
<p>Obviously you're not going to be living large. However, plenty of people in New York aren't living large.</p>
<p>Do you seriously think that everyone who lives in NYC or any other major city earns $40,000 a year? That everyone is an attorney or doctor? </p>
<p>Beginning teachers, cops, firemen, struggling actors and actresses, and lots of others live in NYC and earn less than $40,000 a year. Of course it is "possible to live" in NYC on that salary!!! </p>
<p>Do you really mean can my kid have her own apartment in a doorman building on Park Avenue, have a car, shop at Bergdorf's and Bloomingdale's, pay $300 every 6-8 weeks at a high end salon to have her hair cut and highlighted, and eat in at least 3 star restaurants twice a week on $40,000? If that's your question, the answer is no. </p>
<p>I'm sure you will think my answer is rude, but your question, as phrased, suggests that you don't mix with people who aren't upper middle class a whole lot.</p>
<p>Thanks, jonri, I'll file that in the Let's Jump to Conclusions and Then Go Into a Rant department. </p>
<p>Struggling actors, just to begin to address your, er, comments, usually take a second job in order to keep body and soul together. Are you suggesting that a young lawyer ought to be bartending every night after work? </p>
<p>And second, I don't think it's unreasonable for a student who comes out of 7 years of very expensive education -- and has undergraduate loans to pay -- would earn more than $40,000 after, say, EIGHT YEARS on the job and being, maybe, thirty-five years old. I guess where your mind goes first is to highlighting and Park Avenue apartments. Being an ordinary working mom myself, mine goes to the high cost of childcare, health-care, etc.</p>
<p>Btw, evidently some schools prorate the amount over the threshold. Here's Yale's plan:</p>
<p>"For graduates whose adjusted income is less than a certain threshold level (currently $43,000), COAP covers their entire imputed loan payment. Graduates who earn more than $43,000 annually are expected to contribute 25% of their income above $43,000 to their loan repayment. Unlike most programs, COAP grants cover not only loans for Yale Law School, but also some need-based undergraduate educational loans as well. </p>
<p>"A graduate with an adjusted income of $41,000 (below the $43,000 threshold) and annual imputed loan payments of $10,000 would receive the full $10,000 from COAP.
A graduate with an adjusted income of $48,000 and the same $10,000 in annual payments would be expected to contribute $1,250 (25% of the $5,000 above the $43,000 threshold), and so would receive an award of $8,750."</p>
<p>Now, that makes sense to me.</p>
<p>And actually, for those who come here to receive useful information rather than harangues, a bit of time exploring has yielded a simple answer to my question about law grads who can receive loan repayments, which was, "Surely there is a salary level between $40,000 and big law?"</p>
<p>And the answer is yes. </p>
<p>Here are some examples: </p>
<p>"University of Chicago Law School graduates who work full-time in a qualifying job with a salary of less than $50,000 will receive an interest-free loan of $5,000 a year from the Law School, with each loan forgiven in full before the end of each year. Benefits under HPIP are available for the five years following graduation, for a potential total of $25,000.</p>
<p>"University of Chicago Law School graduates who work full-time in a qualifying job with a salary of less than $50,000 will receive an interest-free loan of $5,000 a year from the Law School, with each loan forgiven in full before the end of each year. Benefits under HPIP are available for the five years following graduation, for a potential total of $25,000.</p>
<p>"Under new guidelines, [Harvard] alumni earning less than $31,000 -- the salary level for many legal services providers and local government attorneys -- will receive full loan forgiveness.
Another major reform concerns alumni with children -- the program has increased dependency allowances, expanded coverage for parental leave, and expanded benefits for alumni working on a part-time basis after having children.</p>
<p>"The School also has increased the salary ceiling for alumni to be eligible for loan forgiveness from $51,000 to $72,000. This increase is intended to keep alumni, such as those who are providing public service as federal government employees or as executives of public interest organizations, from being abruptly forced out of the LIPP program.
Other changes include new coverage of loans related to expenses for judicial clerkships and job interviews, and the lowering the interest rate on LIPP loans."</p>
<p>Columbia also prorates over a threshold: <a href="http://www.law.columbia.edu/current_student/financial_aid/LRAP?exclusive=filemgr.download&file_id=87286&rtcontentdisposition=filename%3DLRAP%20Policy%20April%2000.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.law.columbia.edu/current_student/financial_aid/LRAP?exclusive=filemgr.download&file_id=87286&rtcontentdisposition=filename%3DLRAP%20Policy%20April%2000.pdf</a></p>
<p>And here is an interesting website for anyone who wishes to explore this issue in a thoughtful way: <a href="http://www.equaljusticeworks.org/%5B/url%5D">http://www.equaljusticeworks.org/</a></p>
<p>There are kids and parents who post messages on the boards something like this " I/my S or D just got back my/his/her SAT scores and only scored a 1360. Can I/he/she get into a good college?" Most kids don't get a 1360 and the median score at most colleges is below that, so, IMO, that's a pretty obnoxious message. It's actually less obnoxious to ask "I or my S or D got a 1360 on the SAT. I/my S or D is not a recruited athlete, URM, or legacy. Does this end my/my S's or D's chances of getting into HYPSMC or AWS?" It's a bit disingenuous to respond to someone who is annoyed by the first sort of message to say "I didn't go to HYPSMC or AWS myself and I'm very successful" so obviously you are jumping to conclusions about me when you assume that my definition of "good college" is HYPSMC/AWS." </p>
<p>The question you actually asked in your post was whether "it is possible" for a single person who "only" earns $40,000 to live in a major metro area. I honestly think that's a really obnoxious question to ask on a public message board. </p>
<p>If what you really meant to ask is "If you make more than $40,000 a year, but not as much as at a big law firm, do you have to repay all of your loans?" then you should have ASKED that question. You didn't. (Believe me, I'm VERY familiar with loan repayment programs, because my own favorite law student considered them in choosing. )</p>
<p>Oh, and just to be nice, I'll point something else out that you seem to have missed because you didn't ask...some law school loan forgiveness programs INCLUDE some kinds of UNDERGRADUATE debt.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And second, I don't think it's unreasonable for a student who comes out of 7 years of very expensive education -- and has undergraduate loans to pay -- would earn more than $40,000 after, say, EIGHT YEARS on the job and being, maybe, thirty-five years old.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Aparent5, when you talk about 'a very expensive education' and such, you gotta admit, that's a bit of a non-sequitur, don't you think? After all, the whole point of a loan forgiveness program is to relieve you of the expense of a pricey education so that you can take that low-paying job. Hence, for the purposes of this discussion, it doesn't matter if the law school is 'very expensive' or not. </p>
<p>Nor does a discussion of an expensive undergraduate education necessarily have anything to do with the discussion either. Let's not forget that some people get free rides, either in the form of full financial aid, or in merit scholarships, for undergrad. And other people work while going to school or use other means to pay for their schooling. My ex-roommate's family has several people who used the GI Bill to go to school. </p>
<p>And besides, you don't think there are people in NYC who are 35 and have been working at their job for many years, and still don't make 40k? Really? Believe me, there are PLENTY such people. While many of them are not highly educated, some are extremely well educated. For example, there are "gypsy scholars" - people with PhD's who can't get tenure-track academic jobs, and to stay in academia, stitch together lectureships positions that pay a pittance. Many of them have been doing that for years, and still can't make 40k. Yet they're obviously still able to live. </p>
<p>The big difference between those people and your example doing low-paying public-sector work is that the lawyer could stop his public-sector work anytime he wants and get a regular private-sector legal job for very good money. So if he gets tired of 'slumming it', he could stop. Yes, the loans would then kick in, but his salary would be able to handle it. A 35-year old New York bus driver with no higher education has no choice but to continue to drive buses. The gypsy scholar, if he wants to stay in academia, has no choice but to continue to stitch together lectureship positions.</p>
<p>Jonri, thank you so very much for the lesson in how not to be obnoxious. I know this is one of your areas of expertise. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Sakky, you are presenting various possible scenarios, all of which are plausible. I have in mind, however, my favorite pre-law student and her particular circumstances. She will graduate college with loans. </p>
<p>As for the academic gypsies, I have known quite a few of these in my time, and they certainly didn't intend to end up that way. Some of them, by the way, give up on stitching together lectureship positions and choose instead to teach high school -- which pays better -- or apply for high-paying jobs in other fields, such as consulting. Seems to me a perfectly legitimate and prudent idea that one ought to consider various aspects of a field carefully ahead of time, insofar as that's possible. Jobs in publishing, licensed social work, and elementary school teaching all pay better than $40,000 after a few years in the major metro area where I live, and none of them requires the intense training that law does. Clergy in my denomination, who often cry poverty, get in the high thirties with free housing. </p>
<p>And btw, in many parts of the New York metro area, earning less than $60,000 a year qualifies a person for affordable housing, which is, by the way, at a premium. That is how the firefighters find a place to live, and it's a sad reflection of current market conditions. </p>
<p>And yes, the lawyer can always go work for a big law firm. But as other threads here have pointed out, that is not a balanced life. My original question was, is there something between $40,000 and a big law firm? Seems to me a very useful question. I'm interested to know what other paths young lawyers take.</p>
<p>Okay, I can take a hint. I'll make sure never to answer any question you post again. 'Nough said.</p>
<p>Aparent5, I stand by my point - just because you're highly educated does not automatically entitle you to a well-paying job in the field that you like. You might get it, you might not get it. Sometimes, to do the things you really want to do, you have to be prepared to make financial sacrifices. That's life. A lawyer who really wants to do public service will have to be prepared to make sacrifices. If you he doesn't want to make those sacrifices, then he shouldn't be working in the public sector. Not everybody gets to do what they want to do and get paid well to do it. </p>
<p>Besides, I asked it before, I'll ask it again. Why do you have to go work in New York? Sometimes to do the work you want to do, you have to move to a place you don't really want to move to. Again, that's life. Not everybody gets to live where they want to live. For example, if you want to be a movie actor, you basically have to move to LA. That's not fair to those people who want to be movie actors but don't want to move to LA, but hey, that's life. Just because you want to live somewhere doesn't mean that you get to live there. So if a public sector law job dictates that you live out in the boonies somewhere, either because the job is located out in the boonies, or because you can afford to live only in the boonies, well, that's life.</p>
<p>Sakky, making a choice based on the available data does not necessarily indicate that one feels "entitled." We all make choices based on our values, our history, our preferences and goals. I posted here asking not for a sermon, but for information about the range of possibilities for a future law grad who has debt to repay. </p>
<p>As a parent, I don't tell my children what to do. I do help them gather information when I can. When I look at the option we are discussing, here's what occurs to me: One can contribute to society and earn $25-40,000 a year in many public service jobs <em>without</em> going to law school and getting saddled with $150,000 of debt. If a student isn't interested in big law, and is looking toward a family-friendly work schedule seven or eight years down the road, it's something to think about, unless she has other goals that require a law degree, such as becoming a judge. None of these choices is the "right" one; it's an individual decision, as is the decision to go the big law route. </p>
<p>Considering the ramifications of these choices (and others) is not a matter of feeling "entitled." Actually, it's the opposite: It is a matter of doing some hard thinking about one's resources, limits, and options.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One can contribute to society and earn $25-40,000 a year in many public service jobs <em>without</em> going to law school and getting saddled with $150,000 of debt.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But there you go again - you're talking about the debt. The WHOLE POINT of the loan-forgiveness program is that it forgives your debt. Hence, you continue to raise a point that is a nonsequitur. If you graduate from law school and enter a loan-forgiveness program, then you don't care about how much you owe, because the loan-forgiveness program takes care of it. If you graduate from law school and take a private-sector firm job, then you do have to worry about the debt, but you are also generating an income that can service that debt. </p>
<p>Hence, under a loan forgiveness program, nobody is servicing the public by taking a low-paying public sector job while still being stuck with $150k of debt. So I don't know why you keep bringing it up. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Considering the ramifications of these choices (and others) is not a matter of feeling "entitled." Actually, it's the opposite: It is a matter of doing some hard thinking about one's resources, limits, and options.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This I agree with. However, what I would add is that your situation is within your control. If you don't want to put yourself in a 150k hole, then don't do it. Either don't go to law school at all, or if you do, go to one that will give you a merit scholarship, or go at night (and try to get your daytime employer to pay for it), or take advantage of other means to get out of law school with as little debt as possible. If you know you want to do public-sector law, then it behooves you to avoid assuming large amounts of debt. If you choose to take on a lot of debt, then that's your choice, and you have nobody to blame for that but yourself.</p>
<p>Sakky, I believe the point you make in your third paragraph is identical to the one I make in my second, although there is a difference in tone.</p>
<p>Do the math. If by "major metro area," you mean NYC, someone could very well struggle on $40k/year. Taxes will take out a large chunk of that (city taxes, state, and federal) - so there's what, about $25k/year left? If you are really lucky, you can get a small place, shared with other people, for about $1,000/month. $8k-$10k/year would probably not be inappropriate for food, utilities, transportation, prescription medications, random toiletries, etc. So your kid would be living in a tiny, shared apartment and not have a car - but would be able to make it on $40k/year. She/he wouldn't be saving much (if anything). </p>
<p>Contrast Boston - one could live in Allston or Brighton, sharing a much larger apartment with one or two other people for about $600/month. Food is less expensive, and it might even be possible to have a car. </p>
<p>Read "Law School Confidential" by Robert Miller, which has a neat way of calculating cost of living (and how much you'll net per hour worked) at different firms and in different cities. It also makes the point that you should go into law school knowing what your life will be like when you graduate. I'm reminded of one of the women who contributed to the book - she went to BC Law with the intention of being a prosecutor, but took on so much debt that she has to work in a huge firm for many years to pay it off. </p>
<p>If you want to do public sector work, it doesn't really matter where you go to law school. If you want to be a corporate lawyer, it's much more important to graduate from a really good school. Thus, the idea of going to a lesser-known law school or doing a night programme is much more feasible for those who don't want to work in a big firm.</p>
<p>Thanks, AA, I will get that book; sounds very helpful. "It also makes the point that you should go into law school knowing what your life will be like when you graduate." This is what d is trying to think through. </p>
<p>I think her real dream is clerking and then being a judge, but clearly this isn't a real career path -- more like a thing you can do if you do very well in law school and also get lucky. In my explorations since my original post I have learned that you also can apply for a clerkship after working for a big law firm for a couple of years and that some judges offer salary matching to attract these candidates.</p>
<p>You can certainly clerk after working for a few years. Check out USNews & World Reports - they will list the percentage of students who go on to clerk after graduation for each school. </p>
<p>Unless I'm mistaken, you don't clerk and then immediately become a judge; you would clerk, then be a professor or work, and then become a judge. Someone once said that the best route to being a judge is to room with a future politician in law school - so that's the "lucky" part. </p>
<p>Best of luck to your D. Law school and med school produce people with unusually high rates of dissatisfaction with their jobs and also unusually high rates of alcoholism. It's a good idea for her to know what she's getting in to.</p>