Is Law School a Losing Game? Article - Page 2

I'm just a lowly law student, but I would say that bottom of t1 (which is USN top 50, IIRC) with little/no debt is probably the riskiest move I'd make. Maybe t2 w/ no debt if you were super passionate about lawyering (which I am not). But I definitely wouldn't characterize it as "a great deal."

+1. RJ, what makes a law degree with no debt attached a deal when you're working at Home Depot?

yeah you're right, i guess i meant if it were the right situation for you. it depends, though. it's all about what you want to do. if you're someone who wants to work in the public sector or get a government gig or something like that and you go to a good regional school ranked 55th-80thish it can make alot of sense. especially if it's free. without any debt you can just say "well i have the JD now, if i want to use it i can if not i can move on."


anything free is a deal imo. the market will pick up, too.

Seriously? It's far from free. Even if you get full tuition/room and board, it's an extremely unpleasant three years of lost wages.

yeah. guess it all depends.

So three years of absence from the workforce, three years of wages lost, is free? I'm going to echo what other people have been saying: you come across as very immature and naive.

Hey, I agree fully. If you love law and want a career in it (and don't care about money as much) a T3 school with little debt can be awesome. It's the fact that most people hear "law school" and think bottle service, Italian suits, and 6-figure pay that is the problem. Hell, the notion of T14 and you're set is pretty much gone now, too.

so how is a dude with $250K in debt still living in NYC and eating in a restaurant in UES?

Maybe the dude should blame the dipshit dumbass in the mirror..........

Especially if you leave a job that pays more than $50k-ish. Odds are you'll be back in the workforce making what you made before + debt (full tuition doesn't cover living expenses in most cases) + three years of lost salary. The NPV on most law school decisions is negative.

If law salaries weren't so bimodal it wouldn't be too bad. If you could take a "MidLaw" job paying $90k and do so from a middle-of-the-road "good" school (think Villanova or Temple), it'd be a different story. But the fact it is boom-or-bust, $160k or $50k, for private jobs makes it a bad decision in many cases from a financial standpoint.

no reason to get really hostile. i'm being really reasonable. depending on who you are three years absent from the workforce isn't a really big deal as long as you didn't lose money in the process. maybe i'm wrong here but that doesn't give you the right to say i'm immature or naive just because i happen to be younger than you.


yeah that's a huge problem. i agree 100%. people have unrealistic expectations and think a JD is a license to print money.

My most realistic/ideal school choice is University of Iowa. I'm a state resident, could live at home, and could possibly land a scholarship there. Worst case scenario I sink $60,000 into a JD. Which I don't believe would be that bad for a decent school. Heck, that's on par with the tuition for most T3/T4 schools.

I hope you realize that $60,000 is a lot of money. That is quite a bit more than the annual salary of the average American.

Yeah I'm sure that's why everyone thinks you're an immature little twit.

I'd probably sink 60k into a law degree from Iowa, tbh (I grew up in DSM). Iowa's ranked top thirty or so, right? With a liberal arts degree, you really don't have a lot of options that have any upward potential.

I'll be in just a little bit less for my JD/MBA at UGA. I don't think I've made a horrible investment.