Why should I go to an American school?

[t...]

Harvard:
2007-2008 Tuition: 39,325 USD

U of T:
2007-2010 Tuition: 49,920 CDN




See you at U of T, man.

U of T over Harvard...are you kidding me? You're out of your mind. In the context of the REAL world now, let's compare the opportunities from each school, I mean... oh, (foot in my mouth again)...I'm sorry...slight miscalculation on the circumstances here...nevermind what I said...tell yourself whatever you need to in order to consol yourself now that you own an official Harvard rejection letter...(Here I'll help...together now)... Go U of T! Yay, Toronto!! Yay, Canada!!!

You're a twit.

[thestradgirl]

teehee.

anyway, a response to the post I quoted above:

by markedel

Canada is a poorer country, and the contours of the global economy make it likely that its law, finance, etc. will not be comparable to the simply more dominant New York market.

That being said money isn't everything, and how much more money one needs is relative; how much worse off would I be in Toronto, being in the top 5% rather then in New York, in the equivalent percentile?

The real problem is not the salary differentials, which logically reflect market realities, but the trend in the legal market itself; by siphoning off the best talent New York may make it easier for me to get a job, but in many ways it would be better if the best of the best would stay in Toronto. Not that many or even most don't (after all at least some of the students in Canada could have studied elsewhere), but certainly such global competition will tend to hurt Toronto's market (which is less likely to draw in foreign practitioners) than New York. And that's not so good for the vitality of Canadian law, particularly corporate law, at least not in the long term.

Of course the long run trend may also be to more productive legal services, which is good for everybody, but that's a pretty abstract comfort.

And a 2300 hours target sounds crazy. That's an average (multiplying the target by 1.5 to be realistic about how much one can really bill) of 66 hours a week. Not sure how one has time to enjoy all that money, and even the world's most engrossing and challenging legal work is still work by the 66th hour.

[t...]

I work with people that bill 2000 hours a year, and they are always at work. I couldn't even imagine billing 2300 hours. You'd have to know how to fudge your numbers.

I almost think I like Canada better than the US, straddy.

[Beurre]

I actually wanted to ask you, thestradgirl, if you can help me out... that will be much appreciated.


I think, given my personal background and UGPA and the fact that I have a MA degree (soft factors) can get me into U of T with LSAT score of 162 +.

But, I think I am more interested in practicing in NY than in Toronto, although not entirely sure at this point. Although my goal is Columbia, my LSAT is not really improving much now and not sure if I can score high on LSAT that is sufficient to get me into Columbia. If I don't get into Columbia, for instance, then I am thinking about Fordham in order to practice in NY and get into a big law firm, supposing that I will be top % to get into a law firm.

Do you think that going to Fordham is a better decision for me , even though I am very likely to be offered an admission from U of T? Or, rather, the question is,,, U of T is sellable in NY market? especially in NY law firms? But, U of T is more competitive than Fordham (since U of T is comparable to T14), wouldn't it be more difficult to be in top % than in Fordham, thereby reducing my chance at law firms in NY if in fact I decide to attend U of T?

What are your thoughts?
thanks

[thestradgirl]

I work with people that bill 2000 hours a year, and they are always at work. I couldn't even imagine billing 2300 hours. You'd have to know how to fudge your numbers.

I almost think I like Canada better than the US, straddy.

teehee. If you ever backpack up here, I'll def. give you a place to stay and show you around




to Beurre:

check your pm

[MorningStar]

Beurre, with a 162 LSAT, regardless of your UGPA and MA, you are by no means likely to gain admission to UofT law.  You have a chance it but it's probably less than 50%.

[thestradgirl]

Beurre, with a 162 LSAT regardless of your UGPA and MA you are by no means likely to gain admission to UofT law.  You have a chance it but it's probably less then 50%.

uh yeah. that too. 

[MorningStar]

You didn't mention whether or not you want to live/practice in the U.S, which makes it practically impossible to advise you.

That being said, it's #1 Canadian vs U.S - UCLA/Fordham/Vandy/USC/B.U (probably a couple others you could add in there).  You have a marginal shot at UofT, so the U.S comparison should also be versus your longshots (you might sneak into Vandy, USC, have a great shot at Fordham/B.U).

In this case it's simple.  If you want to live in Canada = UofT.  If you want to live in the U.S = one of the above U.S schools.  If you still aren't sure = UofT.   

[usbound]

You didn't mention whether or not you want to live/practice in the U.S, which makes it practically impossible to advise you.

That being said, it's #1 Canadian vs U.S - UCLA/Fordham/Vandy/USC/B.U (probably a couple others you could add in there).  You have a marginal shot at UofT, so the U.S comparison should also be versus your longshots (you might sneak into Vandy, USC, have a great shot at Fordham/B.U).

In this case it's simple.  If you want to live in Canada = UofT.  If you want to live in the U.S = one of the above U.S schools.  If you still aren't sure = UofT.   

I'd give her a "decent" shot at UofT rather than "marginal"...but being that Canadians contribute significantly to the diversity of American schools, I would say she has a much better shot at an equivalent school (like Vanday)...and perhaps could make it to a better school than UofT like Cornell or Duke etc....also, I think from the other thread I read that she has a green card, and so with that I can't imagine staying in Canada if I were her.

[MorningStar]

I disagree that being Canadian gives you an advantage.  Having completed my U.S application cycle and visited several T20 schools I was accepted to (and one I was waitlisted at), I got the opportunity to speak to some admissions officers.  The general consensus that I got when asking if my Canadian status had played a significant role in my acceptance was that Canadians aren't considered to add diversity the way URMs do.  Sometimes it is taken into account but more often than not, it can work against you.  I was told that statistically accepted Canadian students don't matriculate as often as U.S students.  A large number of Canadians apply to law schools in the U.S along with Canadian ones every year and in the end go with a Canadian school when they are unable to secure funding (it is very hard for a Canadian to get 150K+ in loans to attend a U.S institution, so it usually has to come from family or other sources).  As a result one adcomm in particular told me that they were hesistant to accept a Canadian because it affects their acceptance statistics and it was their experience that these were the students that most often pulled out in late July.

Obviously this is anectdotal and these conversations were extremely casual in setting but I don't think a 3.66 (with drops) / 166 will get a Canadian into Duke for example.  Cornell is dicey and Vandy is a toss-up (check LSN there were 3.9+ / 166s rejected or WL this cycle).