Catherine Rampell lays it out state by state in her New York Times “Economix” article. According to Economic Modeling Specialists Inc. 53,508 people passed the bar exam in 2009, but there are only 26,239 openings. The only area in deficit, Washington D.C.
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/17446/lawyer-surplus/
Lawyer Surplus
Previous post: Low Interest Rate Policy “may inflate asset prices.”
{ 12 comments }
Maybe President Obama will be re-elected by outlawing lawyers. 2015 is only 3 ½ years away.
Marty McFly: [Reading the newspaper from 2015] “Within two hours of his arrest, Martin McFly Jr. was tried, convicted and sentenced to fifteen years in the state penetentary.”? Within two hours?
Doc: The justice system works swiftly in the future now that they’ve abolished all lawyers.
Speaking of lawyers, my limited experience with them have stunned and astonished me.
The lawyers see the law in the same way that a devout Christian sees the gospel and the Bible.
Lawyers think that the law is the inerrant word of God and they follow it like an uncritical robot. I never ever heard them criticize the law, saying that this law is stupid, that law ought to be abolished etc.
They judge the entire universe around them by the law. Lawyers are prisoners of the law. They are like North Korea automatons worshiping their God-law without questions.
Especially, in our judicial system intent process are creeping in more and more and the lawyer I met seems to approve of that, in fact he seems to think nothing about it, he just follows the laws without question and without having an opinion.
Lawyers are automatons incapable of thinking outside the shackles of the law.
For them, the earth really is flat, there is nothing outside of the law.
The law is the center of the universe and the sun orbits around the law.
The law says it, they obey it, that settles it. Lawyers are the most brainwashed people I’ve ever seen.
And to say that most politicians are lawyers.
That is extremely scary.
And what about Stephan Kinsella?
http://mises.org/daily/author/301/Stephan-Kinsella
Along those lines, today I read Clarence Darrow’s “Resist Not Evil.” Absolutely great condemnation of State administered justice. Unfortunately, Darrow was a rare bird indeed.
I always thought of the law to be complete bullshit. An artificial depiction of the world around us that is not based in reality. A huge impediment against free thinking. I put the law in the same group as religion and astrology, both are complete made up stuff that have nothing to do with reality.
They say they want to separate religion and government, well they should also separate the law and government because most of the law is as complete bullshit as religion and astrology.
Laws should be extremely few and extremely precise. In our days, laws are as numerous as the stars of the milky way and they are too broad reaching, overlapping each other. This is a complete mess.
The problem with law is that most people do not have an appreciation for what law really is, a human construct.
I don’t mean to say that laws are BS, but merely to point out that law was created by man. But why would men create laws if not to serve him?
The latter part, serving man, has been nearly completely lost. Man now must serve law, it is a new god. An insensitive, insatiable and hungry god.
“The problem with law is that most people do not have an appreciation for what law really is, a human construct.”
A human construct, that’s basically my point. Laws are like money, they are valuable only when they are few, are clearly defined and cannot be counterfeited. When laws become numerous, broad, over-reaching and complicated, the law loses it’s value as a safeguard of human civilization and served to further undermine it.
“The latter part, serving man, has been nearly completely lost. Man now must serve law, it is a new god. An insensitive, insatiable and hungry god.”
I don’t know what to say. You’re taking words out of my mouth.
Law really is a group of people using hired groups of armed men to terrorize other groups of people for not doing what the first group wanted them to do. Every new law getting passed is society authorizing the use of violence on individuals for some political end.
There’s positive law and natural law. Positive law is manmade and policy-driven, e.g., tax laws, Clean Air Act, etc. Natural law is a priori. The idea is that judges should ‘find’ the law–universally acknowledged and applied principles, e.g., thou shalt not kill–and apply it to the case. This was the idea behind the English common law (i.e., ‘common’ to all Englishmen). The Continent took the opposite approach: the law is what the government says it is. This is ‘civil law’ and is the dominant jurisprudence of the globe.
The use of contracts does not alter the English common law approach: parties are free to contract for as many or as few obligations as they please, within the confines of natural law. Thus, a contract to kill your neighbor is unenforceable: the contract creates a moral hazard. Likewise, a contract with an insurer to pay you if his house burns down is unenforceable: no insurable interest (another moral hazard).
These simple principles could have served to void many of the highly leveraged CDS’s Wall Street firms were selling to each other. Unfortunately, the dominant paradigm is positive law, which means a state of lawless chaos persists everywhere the government has not expressly legislated.
Suffice it to say, common law jurisprudence is completely if not exclusively compatible with libertarianism. I’ve often wondered if this explains why libertarianism is, generally speaking, an Anglo-Celt political movement.
True rights and true laws, from an Austrian anarcap perspective, can only be defined as negatives, not positives. I am amazed at how many lawyers approve of positive laws. I am amazed at how uncritical lawyers are about the law.
Lawyers truly think that laws are godsend and are the absolute truth, they can’t think outside the law. For them, everything is about the law. They follow the law like a computer follows a program.
Cops should be trained as lawyers before they become cops, that way they would be bound by the very laws they are hired to apply, they would not make their own rules as they go by arresting and intimidating people. Cops need a much better education in laws and ethics.
Lawyers would make better cops than current cops because I found out that lawyers have a special bound with the law. The might not be critical of the law, but I give them credit they surely know it well and they abide by it to the letter, they respect and follow the law, they don’t feel above it like cops.
I was very surprised that lawyers absolutely don’t question the law.
I think the real problem is that we have too many laws, not too many lawyers.
Yeah
Comments on this entry are closed.