[vnupe]

(Original post by jacketpotato)
No, that's the average rent for an apartment in Manhattan - Manhattan isn't really a residential area. The rents in places like Brooklyn or Queens won't be as high. You would need to compare Manhattan rent with somewhere like Kensington & Chelsea or the City to get a fair comparison.

Actually Manhattan, depending where you are is a completely residential area... I used to live on 85th street between 1st and 2nd on the Upper East Side (UES), in a junior one bedroom, in a three floor elevator building. The whole area (UES) is residential, except for restaurants and florists etc, and at the time the rent was fairly reasonable, and I suspect it would be considered reasonable in today's market as well... .

The real issue is, who is the NYT's catering too and targeted in this article; its not the average Joe, or the typical NQ (whatever the profession) moving to Manhattan... its for the uber-wealthy... in the article that last couple moved into a 2 bedroom $1million apartment... seriously? And the neighbourhood (DUMBO) they moved into is recently gentrified, and is now considered uber-chic, and very pricey.
If you use the village voice, or any suitable website you would/should be able to find more reasonable rents... but truth be told NYC is crazy expensive, but not anymore expensive than Central London. Think of Manhattan as Central London, cause you could live in the other (outer-bouroughs) and save some money... but a significant number of NQs and urban professionals, love the lifestyle and the amenities that the city brings...

[vnupe]

(Original post by Brevity)
Oh, I dunno about that. There're plenty of places to live in Manhattan (TriBeCa, The Village, Lower East Side) that aren't Kensington / Chelsea levels of affluence. I think Manhattan is more like Zones 1 + 2, whereas Brooklyn or Queens are more like zones 5 + 6.

I would disagree with you about the level of affluence in TriBeCa, and the Village (depending on which part of the Village), but The Lower East Side... agreed. TriBeCa became very fashionable in the early '90s, which DeNiro and other celebs, moving there... it is now extremely gentrified and very very pricey... though it may not look like it from the outside of the buildings...
In the West Village, you are not sniffing an apartment to rent for less than $3-4K/month... you would be laughed at for offering less than $1.5 Million for any reasonable 1 bedroom apartment in that area... it is a very desirable address to have... as is Chelsea (14-23 street)... Ohhh I miss NYC... SIGH

[vnupe]

I voted for the US, because eventually I would like to practice over there, while also practicing over here... I agree you have to jump through less hoops over here (in the UK) to becomes a lawyer (both barrister or solicitor), but getting on the corporate or chambers ladder, is still daunting, regardless of the jurisdiction. Though on pure salary alone, the US corporate lawyers on a whole seem to make more money, even with the currency exchange rate in the favour of the UK

[michael321]

I would like to qualify over here and then work in the US. Best of both worlds, no?

[Brevity]

(Original post by vnupe)
I would disagree with you about the level of affluence in TriBeCa, and the Village (depending on which part of the Village), but The Lower East Side... agreed. TriBeCa became very fashionable in the early '90s, which DeNiro and other celebs, moving there... it is now extremely gentrified and very very pricey... though it may not look like it from the outside of the buildings...
In the West Village, you are not sniffing an apartment to rent for less than $3-4K/month... you would be laughed at for offering less than $1.5 Million for any reasonable 1 bedroom apartment in that area... it is a very desirable address to have... as is Chelsea (14-23 street)... Ohhh I miss NYC... SIGH

I'm glad you corrected me. I don't actually know anything about New York other than reading the NYT religiously (best English newspaper in the world by a mile), watching every episode of Sex and the City, and having a friend from university go work for Bloomberg in New York (his apartment is on the Lower East).

If I lived in New York, I'd just want a nice brownstone.

[jjarvis]

I'd go for FT over NYT. Better analysis, often better reporting. And not just on financial/economic issues.

This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my GT-I9100

[nulli tertius]

(Original post by cbbg)
Wow, it's currently level-pegging between the UK and US (9 vs. 9). I'm surprised about the current poll results, moreso considering that thestudentroom.co.uk is a UK-based site, and many people who know about both the US and UK systems seem to think that the UK system is more reasonable overall. I would be interested in hearing more about why people selected what they did.

I think it is symptom of the grass being greener. British students struggle with the reality of university admission, getting training contracts etc. They only see the successful side of law in America and not the mountainous levels of debt or the oversupply of qualified lawyers.

[cbbg]

(Original post by michael321)
I would like to qualify over here and then work in the US. Best of both worlds, no?

True dat.

From what I hear, it seems that a UK-qualified solicitor might still need to take a 1-year LLM course to qualify for bar exams in the US, and even then, the only states that would accept an LLM for bar exam admission atm are California and New York.

The thing is, I know someone at an international firm who originally qualified in the US but later transferred from its US branch to its UK branch, and began working there immediately, without having to take extra exams that, evidently, are normally required for US-to-UK qualification, such as the QLTR/QLTS/QLTT.

So I'm wondering what the dealio is with this. Maybe even in the UK he only practices American law? So perhaps it's possible to transfer to a US firm and pick up a US salary whilst practicing UK law, without having to rake up extra qualifications?

Would like to hear more about this.

[Observatory]

The US is a wealthier country in general than the UK. Its per capita GDP is about 1/3 higher.

It also has less redistribution from high earners to low earners, so actual standard of living probably converge at around £25k.

[Andicate]

I know this pathetic but I just love the US Legal System... for reasons like:-

1. You don't have to wear those ridiculous wigs & gowns in the court room. A suit just looks so much better, and you can be as fashionable as you want with a suit.
2. There is more space to walk around in US court rooms and cross-examine the victim, compared to UK court rooms - so compressed and... immobile. You can't do anything but just stand up and ask questions. -.-
3. In the US, to my knowledge, there is no division between barristers and solicitors - which I <3!
4. And it just feels a little bit more informal... UK is just all traditional, and "YOUR HIGHNESS!!!!"-styled. While US is so much more modern and contemporary.

Having said that, the cost is quite high :/! Not that I want to go to Law... yet I am taking a Law degree

[michael321]

(Original post by cbbg)
True dat.

From what I hear, it seems that a UK-qualified solicitor might still need to take a 1-year LLM course to qualify for bar exams in the US, and even then, the only states that would accept an LLM for bar exam admission atm are California and New York.

The thing is, I know someone at an international firm who originally qualified in the US but later transferred from its US branch to its UK branch, and began working there immediately, without having to take extra exams that, evidently, are normally required for US-to-UK qualification, such as the QLTR/QLTS/QLTT.

So I'm wondering what the dealio is with this. Maybe even in the UK he only practices American law? So perhaps it's possible to transfer to a US firm and pick up a US salary whilst practicing UK law, without having to rake up extra qualifications?

Would like to hear more about this.

I'd guess you'd have to take the New York Bar (or appropriate equivalent) if you were practising for any length of time.

But yes, by far the best way to work in the US is to go to an American or an international firm, somehow find a niche that makes you valuable, and then ask to move to NY.

[jacketpotato]

(Original post by cbbg)
True dat.

From what I hear, it seems that a UK-qualified solicitor might still need to take a 1-year LLM course to qualify for bar exams in the US, and even then, the only states that would accept an LLM for bar exam admission atm are California and New York.

The thing is, I know someone at an international firm who originally qualified in the US but later transferred from its US branch to its UK branch, and began working there immediately, without having to take extra exams that, evidently, are normally required for US-to-UK qualification, such as the QLTR/QLTS/QLTT.

So I'm wondering what the dealio is with this. Maybe even in the UK he only practices American law? So perhaps it's possible to transfer to a US firm and pick up a US salary whilst practicing UK law, without having to rake up extra qualifications?

Would like to hear more about this.

There isn't much need for UK qualified lawyers in the United States, but you could work in the London or other foreign office of a UK firm.

Foreign qualified lawyers are allowed to practice in the UK provided they make it clear on business cards etc. that they are not qualified UK solicitors. In the US it can be a bit more difficult.

If you have a full law degree, you are probably eligible for the NY and Cali Bar. The LLM is necessary for people who did the GDL. Getting hired and getting a visa are other issues entirely.

[cbbg]

(Original post by Andicate)
I know this pathetic but I just love the US Legal System... for reasons like:-

1. You don't have to wear those ridiculous wigs & gowns in the court room. A suit just looks so much better, and you can be as fashionable as you want with a suit.
2. There is more space to walk around in US court rooms and cross-examine the victim, compared to UK court rooms - so compressed and... immobile. You can't do anything but just stand up and ask questions. -.-
3. In the US, to my knowledge, there is no division between barristers and solicitors - which I <3!
4. And it just feels a little bit more informal... UK is just all traditional, and "YOUR HIGHNESS!!!!"-styled. While US is so much more modern and contemporary.

Having said that, the cost is quite high :/! Not that I want to go to Law... yet I am taking a Law degree

UK courts also have cryptic names, compared to those of US courts.

[nulli tertius]

(Original post by cbbg)
UK courts also have cryptic names, compared to those of US courts.

Tell me about the Surrogate’s Court of Richmond County on Staten Island, New York then.

[cbbg]

UK
Court of Appeal
High Court of Justice
Crown Court
Magistrates' Courts
Family Proceedings Courts
Youth courts
County Courts
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council
The European Court of Justice
The European Court of Human Rights

US
Supreme Court of the United States
The eleven numbered United States courts of appeals
The United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims
United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review
United States district courts
United States Alien Terrorist Removal Court
United States bankruptcy courts
United States Court of Federal Claims
United States Court of International Trade
United States Court of Private Land Claims
United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court
United States Tax Court

[jacketpotato]

^ You've only named federal courts. The State systems are enormously complicated and differ from the federal system.

First you need to work out whether to sue in State court or federal court. If you are suing under federal law, you file your claim in a federal court. If you are suing under state law, you still need to file in a federal court if you are in a 'diversity of citizenship' situation (broadly citizens of different states).

If you are suing in the NY state system you might have your first hearing in the New York Supreme Court and appeal to the Court of Appeals which is the highest state court.
But if you are suing in NY under the federal system you would have your first hearing in a federal district court, appeal to the Court of Appeals and then appeal again to the Supreme Court which is the highest federal court.

New York also has an incredible hotchpotch of town, city, district and specialist courts: if you are being charged with a misdemeanour in Bronx, New York you'll go through a different criminal court system then if you are charged with a misdemeanour in Queens or Manhattan. Its 100x more complicated than what we have here.

[jordonpat]

These is not a major difference between these two worlds, but i still prefer to work in UK.