Lack of Student Loans Polarizing Success

[scottyah]

I was put in an extremely fortunate position because of my parents in more ways than one. But for here- I'm talking about how they paid for my college education. They are pretty frugal, instead of spending money on new cars, food, etc, they decided to pay for their kids education. Enough backstory though, what I wanted to talk about is the polarization I've seen in fellow no-student-debt-as-millennial's.

I haven't seen many on the line, leading a normal materialistic-consumer-while-trying-to-save(kinda)-lifestyle. There's those of us who picked up frugal habits from parents, hid our Fortunate Position throughout college from most to avoid our own guilt and our friend's chastisement, and those who better fit the stereotype of daddy-pays-for-everything kids, whose parents are either heavily indebted from paying or Very Wealthy and money isn't something to worry about if it's under $100,000.

Of course, all the ones who picked up frugal habits also worked a job or two at a time while also applying for scholarships (which really is an odd form of a job. "Free money" usually takes 10+ hrs of work for varying payout sizes) and taking high-paying summer internships. In the newly-graduated working world, these people now have a leg-up and are saving massive amounts of money and living a generally Mustacian Lifestyle.

The people I know who are burdened with debt, however, vary widely on the spectrum of "pay this off asap and keep saving" to "I'll never be able to pay this off so why bother trying."

Have any of you noticed this pattern as a mid to late 20's professional, or is it just my circle of friends?

[PoutineLover]

My parents helped pay for my university education, but couldn't cover all of it so I worked and applied for grants and loans to pay the rest. My debt was over 30k when I graduated and I used 10k of my savings, 10k of my parents Savings for me and a year of working to pay it off. Now I'm slowly building the stash and living fairly frugally, using habits I picked up from my parents and developed from living as a student on limited income. I'd say that among my friends, most of us had loans but nothing too crazy, and some of them are paying them off super aggressively and almost done, while others are in the fuck it stage. I'm probably the only one actively saving for retirement and completely debt free, but I've tried telling my friends about mmm and fire with varying levels of interest. It kinda stung when one of them called me stingy, but at the same time I just know we value different things. She goes shopping a lot, goes out a lot, and spends money on stuff that I don't care about, while I treat my investments as a non negotiable bill and live off the rest. I think for a lot of people they are impressed that I can save so much, but unwilling to put in the effort or cut back on fun to get there.

[Laura33]

I guess I'm not following -- what pattern?  You mention fully-paid kids who came from frugal families and those who were trust fund babies, and you mention that the frugal ones are now frugal themselves; what about the other ones?  Are the trust-fund kids frugal or spendy?  Meanwhile, the kids from families who relied on loans are either frugal and trying to attack the loans, or aren't.  Are you focusing on the polarization across the two groups (full-pay vs. loans)?  Or the polarization within the loan group?

FWIW, I do worry that the significant growth in student loans is going to reinforce inequality; I managed to graduate with $10K in debt and start work at $57K, and I was able to pay off the loans in 2 years.  But salaries have not risen at the same rate as student debt, and now you have kids graduating with $100K-$200K in debt to find jobs at $40K/yr.  Those kids are going to have a much longer road to get things paid off -- and I do think it's very human when you look at something overwhelming and just think, well, fuck it, I'm never going to be able to tackle that, so forget about it, I'll just be in debt for the rest of my life.  The increased debt loads seem to present a very real risk that parental ability to pay for college can significantly affect their kids' long-term ability to be financially independent:  kids from wealthy families can immediately jump into saving, while those who have to pay their own way will have to work 10-20 years just to get to zero.

At the same time, I also think that it's the habits that kids build in HS/college that lead to future success.  E.g., those "frugal" full-pay students succeeded not because daddy paid, but because they expected to work for what they got.  In my own family, I had to work for school, while my brothers got free rides; I was insanely jealous at the time, but in the end they squandered their opportunities and took multiple schools/extra years to graduate.  That's clearly not true for everyone who gets a full ride (my DH did and came out fine), but some people don't learn to value things that are just handed to them.  So in the end, I think the kids who learn to work and save have the tools they need to come out fine -- the higher debt loads just mean that they will have a taller mountain to climb than past generations.  And some of those wealthy kids will happily squander the advantages their parents worked so hard to give them.

[Imma]

I'm in my late twenties and in my circle of friends from high school the inequality is growing massively. And the nr 1 cause of that is the wealth of parents.

We all roughly led the same lives in high school. Some of us went on more exclusive holidays than others, but at that age all family vacations are 'boring' and we all envied the person who was left home alone for a couple of weeks during summer. We all worked in retail or similar on Saturday and no one wore designer clothes. I think we all put roughly as much effort in our homework as well.

When we went to university it was clear some of us had more financial support from their parents than others. In the Netherlands, education is a lot less expensive than in the US (tuition is €2000/year, including books and material you'll spend about €4000-5000/year) but merit scholarships don't exist. You can get a loan for tuition and a loan for maintenance (up to €900/month) but it's all a loan. The average wage after tax is about €2100/month. 

My parents didn't pay for my education. Because I was diagnosed with a chronic illness during my last year of high school, I didn't want to take on a massive debt when I was unsure of my future earnings. I chose to do a parttime degree while working office jobs during. I also didn't move out until I was 21. My parttime course took me ages because I was so busy working to earn money - I earned €3,50 an hour, I had to pay for my tuition and books and I also had to pay my parents because I lived at home. On top of that I was trying to save up money to move out. I didn't find out until later that parttime degree courses have a bad reputation on the job market, it took me longer to get my degree, I missed out on valuable networking opportunities that come with fulltime education and I couldn't afford to do unpaid internships. In the end, I pursued a career in the field of my job, not in the field of my degree course. I graduated with only about €3000 of student debt, which is managable. I started out in my on a lower pay than others would and I because I had a student loan, my mortgage lender would only lend me a low mortgage. I'm clever and frugal and learned to manage money early in life and we're doing ok now, but I'm certainly a lot worse off than other friends.

I started noticing the financial differences when they all moved out aged 18 without having any loans, their parents generally paid for maintenance and tuition. Any money they earned in side jobs was just for entertainment. They could easily quit their job temporarily to do a valuable unpaid internship. And those unpaid internships would lead to a well paid internship which often lead to a job right after graduating. Because they had no student debt, it was easy for them to get a mortgage. Also, because in here anyone can gift anyone else €100.000 tax free as long as it's for the purpose of buying a house, they generally have much more to spend on a house.

I'm not complaining at all, I'm more than getting by and we earn about the average income in our country. But while we still have student debt (at 0% interest, so I'm not paying it off) no car and owe a mortgage of about 83% of the value on a run down 800 square meter home in a bad neighbourhood, and don't go on holidays so we can do up our house, we have friends earning barely more than we do living in brand new 1800 square foot homes in exclusive neighbourhoods because several relatives each gifted them €100.000 . They travel all around the world and wonder why we're so boring that we don't want to see South Africa or Japan.

They can't help that their family is wealthy, but in some ways it's destroying our long term friendships. There are less and less activities that we can share. I think it's a shame because they're not bad people. They are just oblivious to the fact that not everyone is wealthy because money is so normal for them. I know a bit more than 'regular' friends would do about each other's money because I work in finance and help a few of them out with their income tax every year. And as for long term career and FIRE opportunities, it seems clear to me who has the advantage.

[pumpkinlantern]

There's three main scenarios I see where family wealth is a major advantage.

(1) Wealthy young people who failed get a second chance.  There were kids that were unsuccessful either in high school or university, often because they just weren't very mature at that stage in their life.  For the ones who came from wealthy families, they got second chances.  They dropped out of college, took a "gap-year" traveling around the world paid for by their parents, and then eventually went back to school once they became mature.  Meanwhile, the ones who came from poorer families -  they didn't get a second chance.  They had debts and needed to work dead-end jobs to finance those debts and to pay for rent/food/etc.  The barrier to go back to school and improve their prospects was difficult.

(2) Wealthy young people can take longer to succeed or network without being paid.  Unfortunately, in order to get ahead, sometimes you need to "gain experience".  For someone from a wealthy family, they can do volunteer work, or unpaid internships that can improve their connections or advance their career.  Or at minimum, low-paying jobs that are relevant to their career.  For people from poor families, they need to find part-time work during school or immediately afterwards that pays the bills, often in fields that pay the most (eg. manual labor or bartending), which may not be related to their career.

(3) Wealthy young people don't start off with massive student debt.  Kids from families that can pay for their education don't end up tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of dollars (for professional schools) in debt paying for education.  This puts them years ahead of their peers.

Having said that, less well-off people have some advantages too:
- You don't learn life lessons by having everything handed to you on a silver platter.
- You have a healthy respect for money when you earn it yourself
- You learn to be more frugal / resourceful through experience.

If they learn these lessons early enough, people from less well-off families can end up substantially ahead.

[VoteCthulu]

No, most of my friends are currently financially successful  (except for the one that just went through a divorce, and he's recovering). Some had scholarships, others took loans, and one had wealthy parents, but none are struggling to pay loans and afford a place to live.

Did the one who had wealthy parents have a leg up on life? Sure, almost as much as those who were smart enough to get scholarships and go into well paying fields.

[Inaya]

There's three main scenarios I see where family wealth is a major advantage.

(1) Wealthy young people who failed get a second chance.  There were kids that were unsuccessful either in high school or university, often because they just weren't very mature at that stage in their life.  For the ones who came from wealthy families, they got second chances.  They dropped out of college, took a "gap-year" traveling around the world paid for by their parents, and then eventually went back to school once they became mature.  Meanwhile, the ones who came from poorer families -  they didn't get a second chance.  They had debts and needed to work dead-end jobs to finance those debts and to pay for rent/food/etc.  The barrier to go back to school and improve their prospects was difficult.

I never thought of it this way, but this is a totally valid observation. I was one of those kids--I was pressured into college before I was ready, dropped out, worked for a year and a half, then went back. Debt free both times around because of my parents. While it's true that having a "second chance" was a huge leg up in my case, I think all kids would be better off if there was less pressure to be enrolled in a college immediately after high school. And more emphasis on trade schools over traditional 4-year colleges. Taking a year or two off from education right after high school to get some life skills and make some money before enrolling is a much better choice for some kids than going to school, going into debt, and dropping out for good. Remove the need for a "second chance," and this advantage becomes less of one.

[FINate]

I graduated w/o student loan debt. Parents couldn't afford to pay for college but I also didn't buy into the "pursue your passion and don't worry about the cost" bullshit. Paying my own way made me skeptical in a good way. Didn't know what I wanted to do with my life so spent a couple of years "finding myself" at a local community college while living at home and working. Once I got serious about a degree path (computer science) I finished what I could at the CC then transferred to a local university while continuing to live at home.

No need to pay big bucks for an undergraduate degree, especially in STEM, and I was able to start saving and investing ASAP. Graduating without debt was advantageous, no question about it.

However I think there's still a question of cause and effect. I know trustafarians who, although they graduated debt free, are no better off financially after obtaining a degree. They are wealthy, but they already were. I also know people who graduated with lots of debt and are doing quite well now. It doesn't appear that student loan debt is predictive of future outcomes, though it skews the average (all else being equal, better off without debt).

Students today graduate with an average of about $37k in student loan debt. Seems like a lot, but when put in the context of a lifetime of saving and investing it's less than 4% of the way to $1MM.

Yes, there are real horror stories of people way over their heads in debt with degrees in fields where they'll never make enough to pay it off. And the fees and penalties are criminal. I feel bad for these folks and think we should find some way to forgive debt such that bad decisions from youth don't follow people around the rest of their life. (Wish the feds would work with universities to "repossess" or expunge degrees/credit in exchange for forgiving debt in these cases...but don't want to derail this thread.) For most graduates, however, their loans are a bump along the way.

 

[letired]

I also see student loan debt reinforcing inequality in my social circle. The folks who came from families that were able to pay for their kids college with no or minimal debt are financially miles  ahead of the folks whose families couldn't afford to pay for college and have significant student loan debt.

[Lmoot]

 Just wanted to add that not all kids who've had college paid for come from a wealthy family. My grandfather, when he passed, left enough for his three grandkids to pay for almost all of a college education, and each of our parents picked up the rest of the tab, and we all worked part time jobs (though that probably only paid for food and some personal spending).

 My family is not wealthy at all, but it was always expected that we would go to college. I was one of the ones that probably shouldn't have gone at the time. One cousin went on to get her masters in accounting, and the other is currently in med school and will be at close to $200k in debt, even with continuing help from his family. I switched from a BS, to BA in English, just so I could graduate; in my case there would be no 2nd shot at a paid for degree. I started college 2 weeks after high school graduation, and while I got decent grades in high school, I knew, my parents knew, we all knew that I would struggle in college. I just wasn't mature or serious enough at the time. I made it, but just barely. Now I'm planning to go back on my own dime, with a goal and more drive...but will not take student loans.

That being said, there is a huge discrepancy I've noticed between myself and friends who have loans.  For those that actually got decent jobs because of their loans, there is less so of an impact. But it is always in financial discussions that we have, there looming in the background. Whereas student loans for friends who either didn't finish, or didn't get decent jobs, it is their number one expense, and a barrier to them being where they need to be financially. Even though I have made less than $50,000 most of my working life, not having student loans has put me financially in a better place than many friends who have and use their professional degrees, but they may surpass me in a few years if they pay down the loan and continue to grow in their careers.

My job does not require a degree, and fact very few of my coworkers have a four-year degree. Most only have some college, several others an associates. My job will pay for degrees in certain fields, so I am definitely a proponent of jumping into full-time work first, if you don't know what you are doing in college and have no free ride. At least that way you'll be earning money, and could possibly get a paid for education. I just feel like a great big hypocrite every time I give advice on avoiding student loans. I can only guess as to how I would've handled it. I would've handled it probably by not going to school, I had no real motivation at the time, and debt scared me back then too.  I remember passionately telling my father, after failing yet another math class, that I don't know what I'm doing in school. I'm a hard worker, and I would rather work 100 jobs than be in school. I don't regret my degree, as it is a requirement for my part time job, which is the reason why I want to go back to school for a more appropriate degree so I can grow in this industry and eventually switch careers. I had to grow up first, before I could finally figure out what I wanted to do when I grow up.

[pumpkinlantern]

In the end though, it doesn't really matter if it's "fair" or not.  We can discuss what we as a society should be doing to improve inequality and to give "poor kids" a better chance.  And if you happen to be a politician or a policy maker or university administrator or a philanthropist, please do consider these things.

But as an individual trying to improve our own lot in life, we can't really change the system - we just need to stop whining and find ways to make our own unique situations work.  Most of us on this forum are intelligent people with capacity to work and who live in first world countries - that's already a huge advantage over so many other people in this world.

I think that is core message of MMM.  Whatever your situation, you have the capacity to improve your own lot in life, consistent with your own values.  It may or may not be better than your neighbor's, but that is entirely irrelevant. 

[Capt j-rod]

College is an investment in yourself. When you look at all the different stocks, bonds, blah blah blah and decide which one is going to be the safest and highest return. Selecting a college degree should be no different. A PHD in basket weaving does you nothing. When you achieve your degree there are only two employment scenarios... Either you are looking for an employer or they are looking for you. The choice is the burden of the student. Ask anyone who bought a bad stock... They lost their ass. Pick the wrong career and you will lose yours too.

[Inaya]

College is an investment in yourself. When you look at all the different stocks, bonds, blah blah blah and decide which one is going to be the safest and highest return. Selecting a college degree should be no different. A PHD in basket weaving does you nothing. When you achieve your degree there are only two employment scenarios... Either you are looking for an employer or they are looking for you. The choice is the burden of the student. Ask anyone who bought a bad stock... They lost their ass. Pick the wrong career and you will lose yours too.

While I agree with this 100%, the problem is the narrative being pushed at high school kids that you will succeed and get a good job no matter what degree you have. Furthermore, if you don't have a traditional 4-year degree, you will be doomed to a lifetime of minimum wage jobs and failure. So they say yes to all these loans for unemployable or niche degrees because they have been fed the lie that success depends on a degree, but any degree will guarantee success. Often paired with, "Follow your dreams," or "Do what makes you happy." I mostly don't blame people who get huge loans for bad degrees--they were essentially given bad data by people they trust (teachers, parents, guidance counselors, etc.).

I think change lies less in making schools less expensive (although that is definitely a factor), but more in changing the information given to high schoolers. Get rid of the narratives that "a degree is all you need" and "any degree is better than no degree." Start educating students on the RoI of a degree and major (and give them basic financial literacy education while we're at it). Teach guidance counselors to recognize when a student would be a better fit for a 2-year or vocational program and guide them that way. Even recognize when a student simply isn't ready for school. Stop treating the 4-year degree as the one-size-fits-all, instant-life-success solution. Get rid of the stigma around vocational programs and trades.

[FINate]

College is an investment in yourself. When you look at all the different stocks, bonds, blah blah blah and decide which one is going to be the safest and highest return. Selecting a college degree should be no different. A PHD in basket weaving does you nothing. When you achieve your degree there are only two employment scenarios... Either you are looking for an employer or they are looking for you. The choice is the burden of the student. Ask anyone who bought a bad stock... They lost their ass. Pick the wrong career and you will lose yours too.

While I agree with this 100%, the problem is the narrative being pushed at high school kids that you will succeed and get a good job no matter what degree you have. Furthermore, if you don't have a traditional 4-year degree, you will be doomed to a lifetime of minimum wage jobs and failure. So they say yes to all these loans for unemployable or niche degrees because they have been fed the lie that success depends on a degree, but any degree will guarantee success. Often paired with, "Follow your dreams," or "Do what makes you happy." I mostly don't blame people who get huge loans for bad degrees--they were essentially given bad data by people they trust (teachers, parents, guidance counselors, etc.).

I think change lies less in making schools less expensive (although that is definitely a factor), but more in changing the information given to high schoolers. Get rid of the narratives that "a degree is all you need" and "any degree is better than no degree." Start educating students on the RoI of a degree and major (and give them basic financial literacy education while we're at it). Teach guidance counselors to recognize when a student would be a better fit for a 2-year or vocational program and guide them that way. Even recognize when a student simply isn't ready for school. Stop treating the 4-year degree as the one-size-fits-all, instant-life-success solution. Get rid of the stigma around vocational programs and trades.

Agree with the bad advice we give about degrees and "Do what makes you happy."

Society gives prospective college students contradictory messages. On the one hand, they're told "higher education is an investment" - code for it costs a lot and that's ok, don't worry about it. Yet on the other hand some consider it vulgar to look at the cold hard ROI numbers for schools and degrees - college, we're told, is really about personal enrichment and broadening your horizons, and picking a certain school/degree because it will likely provide a good return (as opposed to following one's passion) is frowned upon. $100k+ is a hell of a lot to spend on an experience, especially if you can't really afford it and have to take on debt.

IMO students need to be encouraged to take an unvarnished look at what (and where) they intend to study, and the time horizon for that investment to start paying off. Fortunately in recent years there's been some progress in gathering and disseminating this type of information: https://www.brookings.edu/research/beyond-college-rankings-a-value-added-approach-to-assessing-two-and-four-year-schools/

[FINate]

Another good ROI list, with ability to break out the data by major: http://www.payscale.com/college-roi

[Imma]

I'm torn between 'do what you love' and 'pick something that will get you a job'.

I was one of these kids who at 18 thought they were smart and decided to not pursue full time college, but part time while working an office job. My parents aren't wealthy, they couldn't help me with the tuition and I wasn't planning on taking out a loan. I chose a posh sounding degree, law. My parents really supported me starting to work fulltime in an office at that age, because they had this idea in their mind that you'd get opportunities to grow there and go from receptionist to CEO, so to say.

Only when I graduated I found out that degrees like economics, accounting, law etc that sound good aren't actually that wanted on the job market. And very few large companies are so open minded you can get a degree level job when you used to be their receptionist. I hated every second of my law degree and I never worked in the field either. I'm in finance now and I make an average wage, but I hate finance at well. I'm trying to find a way out without having to take a pay cut.

On the other hand, everyone I know who went to art school thoroughly enjoyed their time and they all make quite a lot of money now. Their schools were selective enough that they wouldn't have made it in if they weren't talented enough to succeed on the job market.

[FuzzyCheese]

I'm torn between 'do what you love' and 'pick something that will get you a job'.

I was one of these kids who at 18 thought they were smart and decided to not pursue full time college, but part time while working an office job. My parents aren't wealthy, they couldn't help me with the tuition and I wasn't planning on taking out a loan. I chose a posh sounding degree, law. My parents really supported me starting to work fulltime in an office at that age, because they had this idea in their mind that you'd get opportunities to grow there and go from receptionist to CEO, so to say.

Only when I graduated I found out that degrees like economics, accounting, law etc that sound good aren't actually that wanted on the job market. And very few large companies are so open minded you can get a degree level job when you used to be their receptionist. I hated every second of my law degree and I never worked in the field either. I'm in finance now and I make an average wage, but I hate finance at well. I'm trying to find a way out without having to take a pay cut.

On the other hand, everyone I know who went to art school thoroughly enjoyed their time and they all make quite a lot of money now. Their schools were selective enough that they wouldn't have made it in if they weren't talented enough to succeed on the job market.

Obviously that depends on what school you went to but in my observations from college every single accounting major at my university came out of college with $50k+ job offers (Chicago market) while the art majors more or less all struggled to find employment and often went back to school to obtain additional education due to the difficult job market.

[Inaya]

I'm torn between 'do what you love' and 'pick something that will get you a job'.

I suspect that there can be a healthy balance. Maybe not "do what you love" but "do what you like/can tolerate." I don't think anyone should sacrifice their well-being doing a job they hate for the sake of money. But I think most people can still have a worthwhile, comfortable job without it being their dream job.

Your anecdote about your law degree is interesting. My dad went to law school to dodge the Vietnam draft, but he ultimately ended up going into bankruptcy law and enjoying it. He recently told me that if he was going to do it again in today's market, he would do something else. He says it is much, much harder to make it as a lawyer these days. He's had a pretty successful career, but he admits he probably wouldn't be nearly as successful if he had to start over in the 2000s or 2010s.

[Imma]

I'm torn between 'do what you love' and 'pick something that will get you a job'.

I was one of these kids who at 18 thought they were smart and decided to not pursue full time college, but part time while working an office job. My parents aren't wealthy, they couldn't help me with the tuition and I wasn't planning on taking out a loan. I chose a posh sounding degree, law. My parents really supported me starting to work fulltime in an office at that age, because they had this idea in their mind that you'd get opportunities to grow there and go from receptionist to CEO, so to say.

Only when I graduated I found out that degrees like economics, accounting, law etc that sound good aren't actually that wanted on the job market. And very few large companies are so open minded you can get a degree level job when you used to be their receptionist. I hated every second of my law degree and I never worked in the field either. I'm in finance now and I make an average wage, but I hate finance at well. I'm trying to find a way out without having to take a pay cut.

On the other hand, everyone I know who went to art school thoroughly enjoyed their time and they all make quite a lot of money now. Their schools were selective enough that they wouldn't have made it in if they weren't talented enough to succeed on the job market.

Obviously that depends on what school you went to but in my observations from college every single accounting major at my university came out of college with $50k+ job offers (Chicago market) while the art majors more or less all struggled to find employment and often went back to school to obtain additional education due to the difficult job market.

I'm not American, that might explain the difference. In here vocational degrees like Accounting aren't very presitigous and Law is an undergraduate degree and it's also one of the most popular degrees. If you are part of the select few that after their Master's degree get the opportunity to get into the course to join the bar, you're generally fine, career-wise, although you don't get paid very well until a few years after passing the bar. Because there's such a big supply of young people with law degrees, you have to prove yourself first before you get paid well.

The art students I know personally studied things like industrial design, graphic design, animation and art management, so they did choose the more vocational art degrees. I can imagine having a history of art degree is less valuable on the job market. But art schools are extremely selective, so they don't attract all those mediocre students that law schools are filled with.

[FINate]

Doing what you love is great if it pays the bills. I just don't see the point in paying $100k+ (and often going into debt) for a degree that isn't remunerative. Not advocating people to go into careers they hate, find soul crushing. If none of the cost effective degrees are appealing then it's better to skip college and do something vocational. I know, this is heretical.

[Inaya]

I'm torn between 'do what you love' and 'pick something that will get you a job'.

I was one of these kids who at 18 thought they were smart and decided to not pursue full time college, but part time while working an office job. My parents aren't wealthy, they couldn't help me with the tuition and I wasn't planning on taking out a loan. I chose a posh sounding degree, law. My parents really supported me starting to work fulltime in an office at that age, because they had this idea in their mind that you'd get opportunities to grow there and go from receptionist to CEO, so to say.

Only when I graduated I found out that degrees like economics, accounting, law etc that sound good aren't actually that wanted on the job market. And very few large companies are so open minded you can get a degree level job when you used to be their receptionist. I hated every second of my law degree and I never worked in the field either. I'm in finance now and I make an average wage, but I hate finance at well. I'm trying to find a way out without having to take a pay cut.

On the other hand, everyone I know who went to art school thoroughly enjoyed their time and they all make quite a lot of money now. Their schools were selective enough that they wouldn't have made it in if they weren't talented enough to succeed on the job market.

Obviously that depends on what school you went to but in my observations from college every single accounting major at my university came out of college with $50k+ job offers (Chicago market) while the art majors more or less all struggled to find employment and often went back to school to obtain additional education due to the difficult job market.

I'm not American, that might explain the difference. In here vocational degrees like Accounting aren't very presitigous and Law is an undergraduate degree and it's also one of the most popular degrees. If you are part of the select few that after their Master's degree get the opportunity to get into the course to join the bar, you're generally fine, career-wise, although you don't get paid very well until a few years after passing the bar. Because there's such a big supply of young people with law degrees, you have to prove yourself first before you get paid well.

A law degree (JD degree) in the US is considered a doctorate, equivalent to a PhD. And (I believe in most states) you must have a JD to sit the bar. Being a doctorate, it has a very high price of entry--but also being very popular, job prospects aren't as good as they once were.

[A Definite Beta Guy]

Accounting is definitely solid here in the states, one of the higher paid majors (up with IT).

I'm actually considering going back to get my a dual masters for it. That should give me some extra firepower on the job market and propel me up to the six figure range faster.