There was that pair of [url=<a href=“http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159%5Dstudies%5B/url”>http://www.nber.org/papers/w17159]studies[/url] on students who either got into ivy leagues and chose to attend state schools, or have comparable SAT scores to ivy league schools but weren’t accepted - they earned just as much mid-career as students who did get in. The exception was that poor and minority students got a slight edge at the ivy leagues.
If these studies are sound, it seems that the difference in salaries is mostly just the result of ivy league students on average being higher achievers, not the schools themselves doing anything meaningless. I would lay down a few caveats:
- IIRC the studies revisit the students after a few decades; there may be a gap in starting salaries.
- Not sure if it breaks down differently per career.
- There may or may not be intangible benefits to particular schools that don't show up in earnings.
- It may matter more for those who make it big in areas like startups, where a lot of your success depends on being able to network, which is much easier at upper level schools.