Is becoming a lawyer a mistake?

[cold war painter]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I think it's harder to get into medical school than law school across the board, whether it's a top school or a middling one. Hell, anyone can go to law school. The same can't be said of medical school.

Residency sucks, but after you pay your dues things get much, much better and easier. Medicine makes a lot more fiscal sense as a lifelong profession to me than lawyering. From a money perspective, law only looks better when you think extremely short-term and assume optimal outcomes that are very unlikely.

Financially that all makes sense, but you also need to take into account that there are some specific aspects to medicine not present in office environments. For example, you are often dealing with people in extremis from a wide range of backgrounds, there are a lot of emotional strains, there's often a requirement for physical dexterity, there's even blood and stuff sometimes.

So if someone isn't the sort of personality to enjoy the work of medicine, they are going to be pretty damn miserable, and it won't be worth any amount of money. The counterpart to that of course is that for someone who does enjoy it, there's a lot more to the upside than just the pay.

Originally Posted by Pantisocrat

If I could do it again, I'd probably go into dentistry.

Yes, I've often thought that if I was to do it over then a smart choice would be dentistry or one of the more niche medical specialities such as ENT, ophthalmology, dermatology, etc. Having said that, I know several dentists who quit to move to medicine mainly because they were bored with teeth.

 

[IUtoSLU]

Originally Posted by clee1982

I thought you guys think first year law makes 150K ish. Base on my number first year associate makes 200K. Unless you're comparing to first year analyst, thought that wouldn't be fair though, since most analyst are undergards.

One last time: it depends on the firm. Either way, law makes more (yes, because more education is required).

 

[clee1982]

Originally Posted by IUtoSLU

One last time: it depends on the firm. Either way, law makes more (yes, because more education is required).

? all right, sorry, didn't read all the posts, but unless first year big law on average earns 200K, they're not going to make more than first year MBA grad. assocaite in first tier IBD. I would totally agree with you if you just look at base, but no one works in IBD just to get the base salary.

 

[rjakapeanut]

as always, no, it's probably not a great idea. unless you really want to be a lawyer.

i never understood how these decisions were so complicated for some people. i can tell you right off the bat right now if i have any interested in becoming a doctor, lawyer, dentist, accountant, nurse, whatever. right away.

the people who struggle with these decisions are the ones who are on the fence anyway, and if you're on the fence about law school you probably shouldn't go. i wouldn't say that it's like doctors and priests (where i feel like the successful ones are the ones who felt like it was their calling) but it's definitely close.

 

[hopkins_student]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Residency sucks, but after you pay your dues things get much, much better and easier. Medicine makes a lot more fiscal sense as a lifelong profession to me than lawyering.
I'm no longer convinced this is true.

 

[hopkins_student]

Originally Posted by cold war painter

The counterpart to that of course is that for someone who does enjoy it, there's a lot more to the upside than just the pay.
There's no amount of compensation that could replace being able to suck out brain.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by IUtoSLU

As I said, it depends on the firm. But even with those numbers, the first year law associate is making more...which was my original point.

Originally Posted by clee1982

? all right, sorry, didn't read all the posts, but unless first year big law on average earns 200K, they're not going to make more than first year MBA grad. assocaite in first tier IBD. I would totally agree with you if you just look at base, but no one works in IBD just to get the base salary.
Unless you're at Wachtell, BigLaw in NYC or DC typically pays 160k first year, base. Year-end bonuses were $30k before the economy turned belly-up. No signing bonus. From my understanding, first year associates in IBD make ~$100k base and 50-150% in bonus, plus a pretty significant signing bonus ($30-40k?). Even in a bad year, the first year banker is matching or beating the first year lawyer in compensation. After the first year, it's no contest. The BigLaw associate will see an incremental raise every year of $5-$10k in base salary, with a similarly incremental raise in expected bonus. In contrast, the banking associate is going up in near multiples. By year four, the BigLaw associate is making ~$250k, all in--the banker is now a VP and making, oh jeezus, it pains me to even fathom. This is a conversation my law school buddies and I used to have. Halfway through the second paragraph, we'd all grow silent and regretful. Invariably someone would pipe in about prestige and job stability, but any nods of agreement were meek and noncommittal.

 

[crazyquik]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

We can go on for probably 20 pages, where all you and I do is contend litigation is/is not a legal tool for problem solving. I look forward to it.

This thread can become a trainwreck in so many ways.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

1) Adding characterization I did not place there.
2) It's clearly a tool.

We can go on for probably 20 pages, where all you and I do is contend litigation is/is not a legal tool for problem solving. I look forward to it.

Look, this isn't really up for interpretation. Perhaps you mean something radically different by the word, but litigation is not a "tool" in that it's rarely a choice where another approach would work. You don't wonder about a legal problem and then say: "A-ha! The solution is to litigate!" It happens precisely because there are no other options at the point when it comes into play.

 

[clee1982]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

Unless you're at Wachtell, BigLaw in NYC or DC typically pays 160k first year, base. Year-end bonuses were $30k before the economy turned belly-up. No signing bonus. From my understanding, first year associates in IBD make ~$100k base and 50-150% in bonus, plus a pretty significant signing bonus ($30-40k?). Even in a bad year, the first year banker is matching or beating the first year lawyer in compensation.

After the first year, it's no contest. The BigLaw associate will see an incremental raise every year of $5-$10k in base salary, with a similarly incremental raise in expected bonus. In contrast, the banking associate is going up in near multiples. By year four, the BigLaw associate is making ~$250k, all in--the banker is now a VP and making, oh jeezus, it pains me to even fathom.

This is a conversation my law school buddies and I used to have. Halfway through the second paragraph, we'd all grow silent and regretful. Invariably someone would pipe in about prestige and job stability, but any nods of agreement were meek and noncommittal.

you can think on the bright side, not many people in IBD made it to the end, and that's associate, check out the casuality rate in analyst. Out of all my friends who went for the IBD route only one went through the entire 3 year analyst program and actually work as an associate for another 3 years before going buy side.

S&T's casuality rate seems to be lower though, trading especially, for analyst especially.

 

[TheFoo]

Originally Posted by clee1982

you can think on the bright side, not many people in IBD made it to the end, and that's associate, check out the casuality rate in analyst. Out of all my friends who went for the IBD route only one went through the entire 3 year analyst program and actually work as an associate for another 3 years before going buy side.

S&T's casuality rate seems to be lower though, trading especially, for analyst especially.

I'd be curious to see what percentage of IBD associates make it to VP versus the percentage of BigLaw associates that make it to their fourth year. I'm betting the casualty rate is similarly abysmal for both.

 

[crazyquik]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I'd be curious to see what percentage of IBD associates make it to VP versus the percentage of BigLaw associates that make it to their fourth year. I'm betting the casualty rate is similarly abysmal for both.

In ye good ole days (2008 or so), NALP said 37% of Biglaw associates didn't make it to fourth year. A combination of voluntary and involuntary attrition, of course.

 

[Don Carlos]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I'd be curious to see what percentage of IBD associates make it to VP versus the percentage of BigLaw associates that make it to their fourth year. I'm betting the casualty rate is similarly abysmal for both.
I would have to disagree with that. Partially it's a self-selecting thing. A lot of BigLaw associates actually wanted to be lawyers. Sure, some of them are there because they felt pressure to do it. But many are there because law was what they wanted to do. Not so for many, and I'd even venture to say most, entry-level bankers. They're there simply because they heard the money is insane, and they have no idea if they'll actually like the work or the lifestyle. Most end up loathing it. Even the greediest, most dyed-in-the-wool materialists end up burning out when they realize that compensation can't be the sole factor behind a career choice. Consequently, the attrition rate is brutal. If BigLaw turnover is measured in years, it's not uncommon for baking turnover to be measured in months. Incidentally, I think we're missing a very sad and under-looked side story here, which is that pretty much any non-law, non-finance, non-medical career choice these days is destined to place you so far behind the curve that it's not even funny. My MBA classmates who went into industry are now 30 and making $100-$150k in corporate gigs, plus a 5-10% bonus if they're lucky. And that's just the ones who could find jobs in this economy, and who didn't get laid off in the last few years. I shudder to think how non-graduate-credentialed corporate employees are faring. Corporate white collar is the new blue collar.

 

[clee1982]

Originally Posted by mafoofan

I'd be curious to see what percentage of IBD associates make it to VP versus the percentage of BigLaw associates that make it to their fourth year. I'm betting the casualty rate is similarly abysmal for both.

I would think IBD have a higher casuality rate, but depends on how you measure it, going to buy side isn't exactly casuality.

 

[clee1982]

Originally Posted by Arrogant Bastard

I would have to disagree with that. Partially it's a self-selecting thing. A lot of BigLaw associates actually wanted to be lawyers. Sure, some of them are there because they felt pressure to do it. But many are there because law was what they wanted to do. Not so for many, and I'd even venture to say most, entry-level bankers. They're there simply because they heard the money is insane, and they have no idea if they'll actually like the work or the lifestyle. Most end up loathing it. Even the greediest, most dyed-in-the-wool materialists end up burning out when they realize that compensation can't be the sole factor behind a career choice. Consequently, the attrition rate is brutal. If BigLaw turnover is measured in years, it's not uncommon for baking turnover to be measured in months.

Incidentally, I think we're missing a very sad and under-looked side story here, which is that pretty much any non-law, non-finance, non-medical career choice these days is destined to place you so far behind the curve that it's not even funny. My MBA classmates who went into industry are now 30 and making $100-$150k in corporate gigs, plus a 5-10% bonus if they're lucky. And that's just the ones who could find jobs in this economy, and who didn't get laid off in the last few years. I shudder to think how non-graduate-credentialed corporate employees are faring.

Corporate white collar is the new blue collar.

Certainly agree with you about the "in month" part...

well, there is another group called engineers, good starting salary (90K for master in EE if you're good), but raise is small, bonus is almost non existant. Unless you work for start up, there is little upside. Though, work-life balance is much better (can still be bad depends on what you do though), and work "can be" interesting, again depends on what you do.