The title is a bit misleading. I’m going to go to law school no doubt about it, the questions I’m facing now are when and where. Traditionally students begin law school directly after college. This three year investment comes and goes quickly. As we have seen in class recently, there will certainly be benefits to this using our methods of present value. As my roommate Kevin would say, law school now is worth more than law school later. However there are many other factors which will affect my decision. This fall, I might not get the LSAT score I’m hoping for, leaving me with very few lucrative options later down the road. Furthermore, there must be advantages to taking a year off: a year of work experience, a trip to Greece? Needless to say, this is going to be a difficult decision.
Let’s first look at the finances. Law school, no matter where you go, is expensive to the tune of approximately $200,000 when it’s all said and done. The present value of law school starting in 2016 is less than the present value of starting in 2015, however that would also mean that I would miss out on a year of work after law school. Assuming I work during that gap year, would the difference be justifiable? Assuming I land a stellar job, above minimum wage, I expect to make roughly $11 an hour (fingers crossed). Assuming I work 40 hours a week all 56 weeks in the year that comes to a nice $26,000. That’s nice, though the “average salary” after graduation at my safety school, is $75,000 a year, and at some of my reach schools the average is much higher. Doing a little math, generously I could invest at an interest rate of 5%. That puts the PV of my first after law school year to be approximately $65,000. That’s much greater than $26,000, thus it makes more sense on a simple financial level to go to law school directly.
What other opportunities would I have if I delayed my law school experience? While I could work, as I have shown above, work is not going to be a key motivator. Experience. I’ve learned a lot going through Carleton, however I feel that many of my skills are quite limited. The ability to solve physics equations, the keen knack for writing blog posts, etc.. I think a year of work would allow me to focus more on my ability to critically read both books and people. Every attorney I have spoken with has encouraged me to hone my ability to look at a person to make educated observations. I’ve gotten quite good at this, though I could be much better. Not only would this job make me a more qualified candidate for a JD program, but it would also propel me to a higher ranked spot in my class. Both of these are desirable outcomes which come from this job. Being that my I value skills far above money, I would have to say that the marginal utility of taking a job has increased significantly.
There are many other options which would be afforded to me by taking a year off. I would be able to spend some more time in Nashville (my favorite place in the world). I could travel to other counties or perhaps just around the United States. Travel would be enjoyable, something that I have not been able to do at Carleton. The more I consider travel after college, the more I’m turned off by the idea. I don’t think I would be able to enjoy travel without enough finances to be able to not worry about money.
In conclusion, I’m sure law school is going to be the place for me and I’m certain that I want to go directly after I leave Carleton. While there are many opportunities available to me if I decide to wait a year, I don’t think any of them will provide utility to me in the way that further education will. Now there are some other considerations that I will need to make, but those are going to come far later down the road.
I think another important consideration about law school is whether or not someone truly wants to go. Law school is a big investment in time and money, and for some it is worth taking a few years off after college to think about their future plans. Spending time and money on a law degree is probably not worth it if you end up deciding to go into an unrelated profession. Not implying that this is a problem you will have! But I think for other people who are not as sure as you are it’s important to think about.
I think that your analysis of the present value of law school is very strong. It is not difficult to see why you made the choice that you did. One implicit cost that I would be thinking about is just the amount of rest that you would be giving up by going to law school immediately after Carleton. This is different for different people, but I know that in my case, though I intend to go to grad school, I would like to take a year or two to do something that isn’t school.
As someone who has gone back and forth on this issue for the past two years, I have made various pro and con lists trying to weigh out the costs and benefits for taking a year off before grad school. Although I understand your economic analysis of taking time off, when I (finally) made my decision, I put much more value on my independence as a college graduate with the ability to travel and have new experiences over going straight through to grad school. As much as I do agree when you said, “While there are many opportunities available to me if I decide to wait a year, I don’t think any of them will provide utility to me in the way that further education will,” I decided that this time was an opportunity to do something I’ve always wanted to do and probably can’t do with the same freedom after grad school. That being said, my parents completely agree with you and would prefer that I do not “waste my time,” but I do not think it a waste, so I guess we, like you and I, will agree to disagree.
I think that your evaluation of this situation is largely spot on. I think it’s clear that even an economic analysis of the decision is subjective, in as much as it comes down to how much value you place on certain hard to measure factors. This particular situation is reminiscent of the backwards bending labor supply curve. I agree with Swathi when she says, “I put much more value on my independence as a college graduate with the ability to travel and have new experiences over going straight through to grad school.” Here, Swathi highlights the important issue of opportunity cost of travel/new experiences. Economically speaking, a JD is valuable as it allows you access to higher paying jobs. So, once you’ve graduated from law school you’re opportunity cost of traveling/leisure will be very high. As such, the substitution effect would dictate that you work and not travel. On the other hand, you seem to be more swayed by the income effect when you write, “The more I consider travel after college, the more I’m turned off by the idea. I don’t think I would be able to enjoy travel without enough finances to be able to not worry about money.” The higher income you’ll assumedly (hopefully) be earning allows you to consume more, to fully take advantage of travel.