Is Law School a Losing Game? Article

what i was thinking - NPV!

not to mention the benefits of working in HR, which isnt exactly a male dominated area.

Originally Posted by w.mj

Click to expand...

You're not doing the net present value of 200k saved over a lifetime. Let's say you return 6% in real terms and retire at age 63. That's 200,000*1.06^40. $2.1m.

That's not even taking into account the non-dischargeable debt that most go into for law school.

That's the future value.

If you took that $200,000 (which you won't actually have in cash) and invest it at a rate of 6% you'd get 2.75 million after 45 years. In reality, you'd determine how much you could save annually and work out the cash flows on a yearly basis to come up with a solid FV. It'd take you years to save $200k; probably almost as long as it would to pay down a $200k student loan. So that value won't really work here.

what?

Originally Posted by Mr Herbert

Click to expand...

what?

What part didn't you get?

the bit where you seemed to exclude any interest on the borrowing of the 200k.

unless you have some interest free student loan system?

Originally Posted by Mr Herbert

Click to expand...

the bit where you seemed to exclude any interest on the borrowing of the 200k.

unless you have some interest free student loan system?

Rich parents? /shrug.

Originally Posted by Mr Herbert

Click to expand...

the bit where you seemed to exclude any interest on the borrowing of the 200k.

unless you have some interest free student loan system?

I didn't ignore it, it just wasn't germane to the previous poster's use of 200k and future value of not going to law school.

He was using the 200k saved and determining its future value based on a 6% ROI. You wouldn't use the interest rate on the 200k in loans in this calculation.

It would come into play if you were determining the net present value of the future payments of the loans when you're looking at the other side (going to law school).

the dumbest thing about this thread is that you guys are going "HURR DURR WHATS BETTER X OR Y", running all sorts of numbers and goofy **** like that. you're missing the big point here.

maybe it's not always the wisest choice FOR THE MONEY to become a lawyer. some people, however, just want to practice law. and it can really be that simple. sure it may not make sense on your calculator, but are you really going to tell a lawyer who loves / is passionate about his work "bro you could've been making way more money if you'd done X, law school was a dumb career move for you financially."

that's absurd. your calculations make sense for idiots who are just "going to law school" as an out but makes zero sense for someone who is going to law school to become a lawyer and practice law regardless of salary.

if you want to get back to the law school debt argument then THAT works. but this career salary stuff is all bullshit and you know it.

Originally Posted by rjakapeanut

Click to expand...

the dumbest thing about this thread is that you guys are going "HURR DURR WHATS BETTER X OR Y", running all sorts of numbers and goofy **** like that. you're missing the big point here.

maybe it's not always the wisest choice FOR THE MONEY to become a lawyer. some people, however, just want to practice law. and it can really be that simple. sure it may not make sense on your calculator, but are you really going to tell a lawyer who loves / is passionate about his work "bro you could've been making way more money if you'd done X, law school was a dumb career move for you financially."

that's absurd. your calculations make sense for idiots who are just "going to law school" as an out but makes zero sense for someone who is going to law school to become a lawyer and practice law regardless of salary.

if you want to get back to the law school debt argument then THAT works. but this career salary stuff is all bullshit and you know it.

Clearly, people who want to practice law (and are okay with years of crippling debt and small salary to deal with it) aren't the target of the discussion.

It's people who believe law school is a route to a large salary and prestigious position at a top firm. Do you not believe that this is the majority of law school applicants to, say, the top 100 law schools? And, if you do believe this to be true, do you not feel it is worthwhile to breakdown the financial ramifications for those potential lawyers who have not done the number crunching?

Originally Posted by BC2012

Click to expand...

Clearly, people who want to practice law (and are okay with years of crippling debt and small salary to deal with it) aren't the target of the discussion.

It's people who believe law school is a route to a large salary and prestigious position at a top firm. Do you not believe that this is the majority of law school applicants to, say, the top 100 law schools? And, if you do believe this to be true, do you not feel it is worthwhile to breakdown the financial ramifications for those potential lawyers who have not done the number crunching?

i do agree with you 100%. my angle is that on this forum many of these cynics assume that every law school applicant fits into the group you're talking about in the second part of your post: people who think law school is a route to a large salary etc.

literally every law school thread i see is filled with individuals spouting off about how bad of an idea it is to go to law school. it's not a bad idea for lawyers, fuckheads.

but in general yeah, you're completely right. i'm just a little aggravated at the pessimism here.

Originally Posted by ConcernedParent

Click to expand...

You forget what makes being a lawyer attractive for most people. We are all ******* English majors and ****. There is literally NO room for upward advancement.

Lets assume, A and B. A has a liberal arts degree and works in HR or something; he starts out at maybe 35k? And over time could probably move to make 55k a year; lets average his salary at 45k a year. B on the other hand has a law degree from a decent school and lets assume his lifetime salary is a paltry 70k (which I understand is the average for lawyers?).

Assume both work til they are 70. A works 48 years, B works 45 years. A will make $2,160,000 in lifetime earnings. B will make $3,150,000- subtract $200,000 for 3 years of lawschool/books/living expenses and **** and B still comes out ahead.

This is where I'm coming from. As a history major in a half decent state school, with a good gpa I have busted ****** for what exactly is the alternative?

I'm sure some exist, but is the ******* HR dept really going to care about my 3.9 versus a 3.6?

With the time I have invested in college I want to see some steady returns soon, and 30K a year doesn't do it for me.

Originally Posted by rjakapeanut

Click to expand...

i do agree with you 100%. my angle is that on this forum many of these cynics assume that every law school applicant fits into the group you're talking about in the second part of your post: people who think law school is a route to a large salary etc. literally every law school thread i see is filled with individuals spouting off about how bad of an idea it is to go to law school. it's not a bad idea for lawyers, fuckheads. but in general yeah, you're completely right. i'm just a little aggravated at the pessimism here.
You seem to be ignoring the obvious. Let's do as you say and forget about the people who think law school is a path to a comfortable salary. You're left with the people who think the practice of law will be a fulfilling career. From your posts, you indicate that you are one of these people. The reality is that getting the job that you think will provide you with that fulfillment has become exceptionally difficult. It's not just the people who think they'll make $150K out of law school that are finding great disappointment with job prospects in the legal field. It's also the people who think they'll be happy simply practicing law that are also finding great disappointment with job prospects in the legal field. Law school applicants are unbelievably naive not only about their financial prospects, but also about what practicing law entails.

The "Sky is falling" aspect of the article and this thread is ridiculous. Being an attorney from California, where competition is fierce, most if not all of my Classmates and other attorney friends are successful and have jobs. The only one not succesful and still working as "document review" is still getting $35 an hour and has been employed since we all graduated, albeit his has skipped from one project to another.

The point: yes its ******* difficult but it is not as critical as that article portrays.

Originally Posted by caxt

Click to expand...

This is where I'm coming from. As a history major in a half decent state school, with a good gpa I have busted ****** for what exactly is the alternative?

I'm sure some exist, but is the ******* HR dept really going to care about my 3.9 versus a 3.6?

With the time I have invested in college I want to see some steady returns soon, and 30K a year doesn't do it for me.

You have a 3.9 at a state school, unless your state school is UC Berkeley or Cornell, I'm pretty sure you didn't bust your ass.

Originally Posted by djblisk

Click to expand...

The "Sky is falling" aspect of the article and this thread is ridiculous. Being an attorney from California, where competition is fierce, most if not all of my Classmates and other attorney friends are successful and have jobs. The only one not succesful and still working as "document review" is still getting $35 an hour and has been employed since we all graduated, albeit his has skipped from one project to another.

The point: yes its ******* difficult but it is not as critical as that article portrays.

And I'm an attorney in D.C. where the competition is fierce, and most of my attorney friends are successful and have jobs. My anecdotal evidence is not particularly indicative of much, though.