Fighting Back Against the Lawyers?

[Charles Stucker]

why do you think lawyers are paid more?

Because they create cases tio increase demand. Law of supply and demand - the USA has LOT of lawyers. For them to make so much requires them to create demand.

and if they are, why not ask why people who play sports or make movies for a living are paid more than teachers (which REALLY should be your focus)

the answer... athletes and entertainers, like lawyers, generate wealth. i consider it profit sharing.

Athletes and entertainers are not like lawyers. No one can go to jail on a trumped up charge for not hiring a good enough Stand up Comic.

why aren't you complaining about what doctors earn?

Doctor's don't actually earn all that much after they pay for malpractice insurance.

why aren't you complaining about what entertainers earn?

I already addressed this on eabove - entertainers are like lottery winners.

why aren't you complaining about what CEO's earn?

I do complain about that. Particularly when they are highly compensated for sending a company down the toilet.

Seems to me that you're focused on lawyers because someone else's propaganda told you to.

Seems to me you focus on lawyers because you have something you know you must defend.

 

[George Costanza]

1st step re-enable the rules that prevented lawyers from any specialty advertising
I recall when that was deregulated and what we opponents said would happen did.

I agree.

 

[George Costanza]

I would LOVE to see the day that small businessmen everywhere fight back. A day where lawyers cannot get a suit dry-cleaned. Where they are refused service in restaurants and are tossed from taxicabs. A day where lawyers are shunned from polite circles. Alas, this type of blacklisting has already been tried, and it failed. We used to expose and shun the Communists and Socialists in our midst. Today they run the DNC..


-M40-

Excellent idea! But how would we be able to identify all the lawyers so that others would know how to shun them and refuse services to them?

I know! We could force them to wear a cloth patch on their arm. Let's see - perhaps it could be a unique design of some kind - maybe a six-sided star or something like that. Or, possibly, we could force them to wear a piece of cloth on their chest with a big letter L on it in blazing red. Or we could tattoo "Lawyer" on their wrist in dark-colored ink. Or all of the above!

How about THIS - let's not stop there. Why don't we pass a law requiring all lawyers to go to "centers" with their wives and children. They could stay there until, perhaps someone like YOU, could figure out what to do with them.

You might want to call it the "Final Solution" or something like that.

You sound like a person with really far-reaching ideas. Keep it up. Maybe, some day, all of your dreams will come true.

 

[Vanquish]

Charles, you're talking out of your ass at this point.

Malpractice doesn't magically make doctors into noble paupers. I have lots of doctor friends who make insane amounts of money. Just waiving the jargon "malpractice insurance" doesnt win your argument.

Let's take your "supply and demand" talk. You realize that your ilk complains that there arent enough doctors. That's higher demand for doctors. You also realize that people of your ilk complain that there are too many lawyers. That's lower demand for lawyers. You really seem silly once someone tries to take you seriously.

If you're insane enough to think that lawyers create more crime...there's no helping you. You must be wearing a tin-foil hat at home while you type.

 

[Charles Stucker]

You also realize that people of your ilk complain that there are too many lawyers. That's lower demand for lawyers. You really seem silly once someone tries to take you seriously.

The US has more lawyers per capita than any other nation (unless Britain recently passed us).
You can check that statistic.
Why then are not the US lawyers paid less than their counterparts in other countries?

Doctors generally provide an important service to people.

The USA has some of the highest crime in the world. Certainly the highest by far of the industrialized world.

Certain factors are known to reduce crime
Wealth - the USA is one of the wealthiest nations on Earth, indicating that we should have low crime.
Education - Until the Federal government (run by lawyers) began meddling with local schools, the USA had one of the best education systems in the world. We still have a moderately well educated populace despite the Federal attempts to take over education.
Prisons - It should be intuitively obvious that an individual incarcerated cannot commit a crime against the public, and the USA has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world.
Death Penalty - Once you execute a criminal they cannot commit more crime, and the USA is about the only industrialized nation which still executes criminals.
Police - More police means more people to catch the criminals, which would indicate a reduction in crime.

So given all those facts, what conclusion can we reach? Use the ancient principle of Jurisprudence and ask "Who Benefits" from increased crime. Then the answer is obvious.
The Lawyers benefit, thus what lawyers create (once they reach a certain critical mass) is MORE CRIME, not less.

 

[GHook93]

.
You can check that statistic.
Why then are not the US lawyers paid less than their counterparts in other countries?

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country? We still far out pace China, Japan or Germany's GDP! With more business transactions, requires more lawyers bud!

Funny how every one hates lawyers, calling them useless, until they actually need one. Look over this document for me? What should I do because he did......?

 

[goldcatt]

.
You can check that statistic.
Why then are not the US lawyers paid less than their counterparts in other countries?

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country? We still far out pace China, Japan or Germany's GDP! With more business transactions, requires more lawyers bud!

Funny how every one hates lawyers, calling them useless, until they actually need one. Look over this document for me? What should I do because he did......?

Don't forget the two biggies:

"Can I sue for that?" and "How much can I get?"

 

[Charles Stucker]

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country?

Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than the USA, and fewer lawyers per capita.
More business but fewer lawyers, and lower crime rates.
How is that again?

Who benefits from high crime rates?
Lawyers certainly do, ergo they become a prime suspect in the case of what causes higher crime rates.
If lawyers only did legitimate business work then they could not command such high fees unless they were few and far between. They have to create extra demand to keep their fees high.

 

[George Costanza]

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country?

Who benefits from high crime rates?
Lawyers certainly do, ergo they become a prime suspect in the case of what causes higher crime rates.

Yes - there is HUGE money to be made in the practice of criminal law. Your potential clients invariably come from the highest social/economic levels of society, are brimming over with wealth and pay extremely large fees with no complaints whatsoever. Most lucrative.

If lawyers only did legitimate business work then they could not command such high fees unless they were few and far between. They have to create extra demand to keep their fees high.

Yes, those scumbag criminal defense lawyers - too bad they are not engaged in "legitimate business work." And yet, they still seem able to command "high fees." Amazing.

How about we just do away with criminal defense lawyers entirely? Then we wouldn't have to go to all the expense of the administration of criminal justice - you know, those bothersome TRIALS and such. Police could just arrest someone, bring them before a judge, they could be sentenced and that would be the end of it. After all, the police never make mistakes, right?

By jove - I think we've hit on something here!

 

[geauxtohell]

It all sounds great until you are the one injured through no fault of your own.

It all sounds great until you realize the AMA is a moderately powerful lobbying group with virtually no clout over the medical profession or the practice of medicine.

It would be like claiming the NRA enforced gun laws.

 

[GHook93]

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country?

Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than the USA, and fewer lawyers per capita.
More business but fewer lawyers, and lower crime rates.
How is that again?

Who benefits from high crime rates?
Lawyers certainly do, ergo they become a prime suspect in the case of what causes higher crime rates.
If lawyers only did legitimate business work then they could not command such high fees unless they were few and far between. They have to create extra demand to keep their fees high.

Luxembourg is your example? One of the smallest countries in the world! Great example. Not even worth a counter-argument.

Lawyers benefit from crime rates no doubt, but the vast majority of crime is committed by pennyless thugs. No lawyer wants to touch them.

Funny, getting out of law school everyone warns about criminal law, since its tough as nails to break into (no pun intended) and its hard as shit to make a big bucks in!

 

[geauxtohell]

Did you ever thing that could be that we do more business than every other country?

Luxembourg has a higher GDP per capita than the USA, and fewer lawyers per capita.
More business but fewer lawyers, and lower crime rates.
How is that again?

Who benefits from high crime rates?
Lawyers certainly do, ergo they become a prime suspect in the case of what causes higher crime rates.
If lawyers only did legitimate business work then they could not command such high fees unless they were few and far between. They have to create extra demand to keep their fees high.

Luxembourg is your example? One of the smallest countries in the world! Great example. Not even worth a counter-argument.

Lawyers benefit from crime rates no doubt, but the vast majority of crime is committed by pennyless thugs. No lawyer wants to touch them.

Funny, getting out of law school everyone warns about criminal law, since its tough as nails to break into (no pun intended) and its hard as shit to make a big bucks in!

Afghanistan doesn't have many lawyers either. Or a legal system at all for that matter....

 

[chanel]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

 

[goldcatt]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That already exists for those who receive free legal representation as a right in criminal matters. It's called the Public Defender. For those who receive legal representation as a right in certain types of civil cases, it's called Legal Aid (or similar, depending on the State). Both of these are usually staffed by attorneys who are State or local employees drawing a reasonable civil servant salary. Occasionally they are private attorneys drawn from a pool, assigned to handle a specific case and paid a standard fee for their services.

Do you mean to imply teachers are not allowed to choose work in private schools or for private businesses such as tutoring centers, curriculum developers or other related fields if they do not want to be government employees?

 

[geauxtohell]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That already exists for those who receive free legal representation as a right in criminal matters. It's called the Public Defender. For those who receive legal representation as a right in certain types of civil cases, it's called Legal Aid (or similar, depending on the State). Both of these are usually staffed by attorneys who are State or local employees drawing a reasonable civil servant salary. Occasionally they are private attorneys drawn from a pool, assigned to handle a specific case and paid a standard fee for their services.

Do you mean to imply teachers are not allowed to choose work in private schools or for private businesses such as tutoring centers, curriculum developers or other related fields if they do not want to be government employees?

Thread killer!

 

[goldcatt]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That already exists for those who receive free legal representation as a right in criminal matters. It's called the Public Defender. For those who receive legal representation as a right in certain types of civil cases, it's called Legal Aid (or similar, depending on the State). Both of these are usually staffed by attorneys who are State or local employees drawing a reasonable civil servant salary. Occasionally they are private attorneys drawn from a pool, assigned to handle a specific case and paid a standard fee for their services.

Do you mean to imply teachers are not allowed to choose work in private schools or for private businesses such as tutoring centers, curriculum developers or other related fields if they do not want to be government employees?

Thread killer!

Not if she answers my question.

 

[GHook93]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

Legal representation is only available in a criminal trial via the 6th amendment. Legal representation is not provided as a right under any other circumstance under the constitution! But cute way to twist the current healthcare debate to this scenario.

 

[Charles Stucker]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That sounds like a great idea. In fact the salary of lawyers could be set to equal the salary of teachers. No private practice allowed because the lawyers want to have a government enforced monopoly (called the bar) - sounds extremely fair to me.

As for who represents penniless thugs - that would be public defenders who get paid by the case and hence give extremely poor service - they have no care about winning, just finishing the case and getting paid. At the same time there is a Prosecutor and Judge for each of those penniless thugs and they get paid very generously. I recall a story in the 90's about Texas judges complaining that they made "only" $90,000 per year and could earn so much more in private practice.

 

[goldcatt]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That sounds like a great idea. In fact the salary of lawyers could be set to equal the salary of teachers. No private practice allowed because the lawyers want to have a government enforced monopoly (called the bar) - sounds extremely fair to me.

As for who represents penniless thugs - that would be public defenders who get paid by the case and hence give extremely poor service - they have no care about winning, just finishing the case and getting paid. At the same time there is a Prosecutor and Judge for each of those penniless thugs and they get paid very generously. I recall a story in the 90's about Texas judges complaining that they made "only" $90,000 per year and could earn so much more in private practice.

Here's a thought, you could cut the lawyers and judges out altogether, scrap the whole process of a trial, and just let the cops shoot anybody they suspect committed a crime. Save time and money, and boy that'd teach those damn lawyers!

 

[chanel]

Health insurance is not a "right" but legal representation is.

I propose ULC - universal legal care. Its not "fair" that rich people get better representation than the poor ones. All lawyers should be civil servants and get paid a fair salary just like cops and teachers. What say you?

That already exists for those who receive free legal representation as a right in criminal matters. It's called the Public Defender. For those who receive legal representation as a right in certain types of civil cases, it's called Legal Aid (or similar, depending on the State). Both of these are usually staffed by attorneys who are State or local employees drawing a reasonable civil servant salary. Occasionally they are private attorneys drawn from a pool, assigned to handle a specific case and paid a standard fee for their services.

Do you mean to imply teachers are not allowed to choose work in private schools or for private businesses such as tutoring centers, curriculum developers or other related fields if they do not want to be government employees?

I was being facetious goldcatt. But if the prez wants to control executive compensation, perhaps it's time to limit "windfall" compensation from outrageous settlements. The lawyer/politicians have no problem demonizing the "bankers" and limiting Medicare/Medicaid reimbursement to doctors, so why not tort reform? I'm sure they have it in other socialist countries.

Rhetorical question of course.