<p>A friend of mine started last year as an associate at a NYC law firm at around $140k. I don't think $195k seven or eight years down the road is out of the question for a big law firm if the economy picks back up.</p>
<p>^ Location makes a big diff, my family friend is in NYC as well, but once you're out of a major city, especially NY, the average starting salary starts to go way down.</p>
<p>Regardless, $195k is a pretty high expectation, although not out of the question if he graduates from a top 14 Law school in the top quarter of his class, does Law Review, has some work experience, and gets a job with a big firm in NYC. Also depends what kind of law he chooses to do (corporate law has a bigger payoff, but the hours are CRAZY and not worth it imo...I hear people who work in that field do so for less than a decade at most).</p>
<p>That's right. All I'm saying is there's a potential for $195k. Expecting it is something entirely different.</p>
<p>It's never an expectation. Best case scenario. But nobody gloats about their worst case scenario, do they? ;) The billion future IBers here on CC don't gloat about getting fired in a down economy, and working 100hrs/wk with no bonus, and they shouldn't, it's nothing to gloat about.</p>
<p>Sternies never intimidated me, they don't now, and they never will. I've always understood Yale as the academia school-the kind of school you go to if you want to become a professor. Actually, the highest average salaries come from the likes of NYU, Penn and Columbia Law, not Harvard/Yale. I figured that was because a lot of the H/Y kids want to be professors or go into clerkships and the like.</p>
<p>But if you're from a top school, you're not going to have trouble finding jobs unless you had a D average.</p>
<p>And as for specialty, I'm looking into corporate bankruptcy/restructuring/tax-that kind of thing. I figure the only constant in the American Economy is incompetent upper management.</p>
<p>I love how a simple exaggerated comment I made on an online forum caused so much controversy. Only on CC. ;)</p>
<p>haha I wouldn't say it's controversial, just a bit of a stretch to tell people you'll make that much...as a fellow NYU Econ pre-Law major, if i met you and you told me you expect to make nearly $200k right outta school, i'd be like, whaaat?!</p>
<p>anyway I think it's cool you've thought so far ahead - there are so many types of law, and I can't settle on one! i'm just a freshman though so plenty of time.</p>
<p>communication</p>
<p>^^ really?, i was always under the impression that was sort of a joke major...</p>
<p>yup that more and more people are starting to do. suchhh a joke. maybe its not smirked at by a lot of people, but i will smirk at it.</p>
<p>Least: Criminal Justice, Engineering, Music, Gerontology (most people have to ask what it is and even after they find out it's the study of aging, for some reason they still don't smirk)</p>
<p>Most: Women's Studies (HANDS DOWN), Hospitality/Hotel/Parks/etc Management, Geography, Sociology, Math, Theatre, Nursing (for men)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Latin is not useless, so stop calling it that. It is the root of the Romance and English languages,
[/quote]
[quote]
It is the root .... of the English language,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uhhh ... no. English is a Germanic language. Latin is not the parent of English, it is the cousin of it (their common ancestor is Proto-Indo-European).</p>
<p>Please for goodness sake review your linguistics again before you go on rambling about things you don't know.</p>
<p>Do you even know the difference between genetic and sprachbund linguistic influence?</p>
<p>Maybe s/he meant that English grammar was modeled after Latin grammar in some instances?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nobody actually smirks at engineers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>We math majors do all the time. Lack of rigor in courses, too much estimation.. i can go on and on.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maybe s/he meant that English grammar was modeled after Latin grammar in some instances?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Modeled yes, but inaccurately by misguided medieval ignorance and with a misunderstanding of what made up a linguistic system. This no way makes Latin the "root" of the English language. </p>
<p>In the modern era ... English grammar is modeled ... descriptively as English grammar, or as an instantiation of Universal Grammar. It may bear resemblances to Indo-European grammars out of genetics, and analytic grammars (like Chinese) out of convergent evolution.</p>
<p>I also smirk at people who go on about random "trivia" from their major (any details from any major I consider to be pointless "trivia"). This includes linguistics.</p>
<p>Molly-I'm not dumb. I wouldn't say that to a prelaw.</p>
<p>
[Quote]
We math majors do all the time. Lack of rigor in courses, too much estimation.. i can go on and on.
[/Quote]
For a physicist a intuitive proof together with perfect matching experimental data is by far enough, and all approximations are valid in respective reference frame or nothing would be possible to calculate, the reason physics is harder than math is because you need to learn which estimation is valid in which frame and for each new frame you have to recheck every estimation which every operation contains to see if it is still valid. </p>
<p>What is really dumb though is needing to do huge proofs for things such as why 2+2=4 or that you are able to pick one element out of each set of a set of sets needs its own axiom.</p>
<p>What engineers struggle the most with is normally not the maths but the physics, math rigidity is among the most useless things ever aside from for math professors and then the rigidity is just there to make sure that even the densest of persons can't misinterpret what you are saying.</p>
<p>What is important in math is that you know what you are doing(Unless you are a professor as I said), rigorous proofs are there to show others what you are doing but are totally worthless for the understanding of each person since intuitive proofs are much more effective at that.</p>
<p>Math majors smirk at engineers.
The math they have to take is way easier- at my college, they even have a "Linear Algebra for Engineers" class.
It is not easy of course but it is certainly easier than the linear algebra math/physics/compsci majors have to take..</p>
<p>
[Quote]
Math majors smirk at engineers.
The math they have to take is way easier- at my college, they even have a "Linear Algebra for Engineers" class.
It is not easy of course but it is certainly easier than the linear algebra math/physics/compsci majors have to take..
[/Quote]
I can agree with that though, engineers are usually really bad at maths. But economists are really a lot worse.</p>
<p>And a real physicists thinks that their subject is really superior over the lesser hard sciences such as chemistry or biology.</p>
<p>Who smirks at physicists?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I also smirk at people who go on about random "trivia" from their major (any details from any major I consider to be pointless "trivia").
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Umm ... knowing that English is a Germanic language is a basic fact, not trivium. You kind of need it to analyse the dialectology and history of the English language.</p>
<p>(And I'm not a linguistics major -- I switched to physical chemistry and cognitive science, which will have elements of linguistics in it.)</p>