<p>No, I meant 2200 (so that all of the naysayers would realize just how reasonable (and unlikely)) that number of hours is in this context.</p>
<p>If that same associate works 3000 hours (to come out with about 2500 or so billable if he or she is very efficient), he or she would be making less than $35/hour.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not always true.</p>
<p>Many, if not most, of the most prestigious and highest paying law firms are lockstep all the way through the associate years, and then substantially lockstep through much of the partnership years. </p>
<p>Some firms do have an “eat what you kill” policy for partners, but profits are spread around so that, among other things, partners in cyclical parts of the business (like bankruptcy, for example) will still make money during booming economic times/slower economic times, etc. Often, most partners do not even know for sure how much money their partners make from year to year. It all depends upon the terms of the partnership agreement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ya think? Is this thread for real? A single, un-encumbered 24 year-old is pretty wealthy making 60k period.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, the operative word here is “un-encumbered.” $160,000 in NYC, after state, local, and federal taxes, and after paying loans and rent, does not come out to that much. You can definitely live; it’s fine. But it’s not luxury or anything. Most of my “encumbered” friends making 160,000$ are living in studios. Others, with SOs, have nice 1BRs.</p>
<p>No one is complaining. But 160,000$ for a newly minted law graduate is not obscene at all.</p>
<p>Both of my parents have PhD’s (one in computer science and the other in history) and that is more than they make combined – and we are one of the “better-off” families I know.</p>
<p>Are you… by any chance… READING these posts to which you are responding? Your parents probably aren’t, each, carrying $200,000 in student loan debt.</p>
<p>fwiw i agree 160k is obscene for a starting salary, but that is the whole point. if its a deal with the devil it better be worth a huge payday :)</p>
<p>Must remind all that I am bringing a British perspective to this. I grew up in an desirable town, a nice life-and would be happy to make £50k a year. Dont need or want the fancy car, house or boat. A small apartment in the city [of 150,000], enough to pay by bills and live comfortably is plenty for me. :)</p>
<p>Oh and enough to give my monthly contribution to the Labour Party. :)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not any more, considering they are both in their 50’s. They certainly were for most of their post-graduate lives.</p>
<p>? PhD’s should have been fully funded.</p>
<p>I don’t know why you would think that PhDs are fully funded. I am a psychologist and my parents had to pay for all of my 4 years of schooling. they are lucky that I finished so fast.</p>
<p>This is confusing to me. Graduate school is fully funded, isn’t it? I’ve never before met a PhD candidate who was paying tuition. Including my cousin the future psychologist, who actually has a very generous double stipend.</p>
<p>I know people who were admitted to PhD programs without funding, though I don’t know any who accepted the offer. But I’m sure some people with enough money have.</p>
<p>It is rare for a PhD student to not be fully funded, nowadays. It is the norm. Of course, if someone begins as an MA student and then transfers into the PhD track, then that is very different.</p>
<p>also if there are people who continue their day jobs while pursuing their PhD so they will nto get funding because they are not available for TA/GA duties.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>err, I think you mean you’re lucky that your parents paid your way through school.</p>
<p>And no, most PhD candidates do not recieve full funding.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Lib: I’m still confused, especially when you also see posts #53, 54, and 55. They concede exceptions (none of which I’ve ever seen, but would make sense), but all agree that fully funded PhD’s are the overwhelming norm.</p>
<p>
What are you talking about? $35/hour <em>net</em> is insanely good money.</p>
<p>Plumbers make $35/hour net? In NYC only?</p>
<p>Well, Sally’s 3000 hour estimate comes out to about $53/hour pre-tax. (160/3.) I do know some plumbers who make (slightly) more than that. (California.)</p>