So You Want to Be A Lawyer.

[Billy_Pilgram]

<p>

It’s one thing to acknowledge that you overstated your case. It’s another to change your position without acknowledging it. It’s not a matter of what you are “allowed” to do.

</p>

<p>It’s neither an overstatement or a change in position, it’s merely a clarification. Pick away.</p>

<p>

And yes, if you continue to say silly things

</p>

<p>That’s your opinion. I’ve not been very impressed by your posts, to say the least.</p>

<p>

I will probably continue to pick them apart

I’ll admit I’m overmatched in this arena, since that’s what you do for a living, and seem to have a lot of free time to do it here.</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

things have changed since 1984. In particular, hipaa laws providing better access to medical records may help plaintiff’s attorneys screen cases better; plus, perhaps there are more laws on the books (such as california’s nonpecuniary damages cap; i don’t know when that was passed). Finally – perhaps medical malpractice actually has increased. This is actually not crazy. As medical science progresses and we learn more and more about what does and doesn’t harm patients, clinical guidelines have presumably become more and more strict.

</p>

<p>Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps. It seems to me that such speculation is not a very solid basis to choose one study over the other. Especially give the (apparently) wildly different results of the studies.</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

That’s your opinion. I’ve not been very impressed by your posts, to say the least.

</p>

<p>I’ve never known anyone to be very enthusiastic when I’ve pointed out their silliness.</p>

<p>

I’ll admit I’m overmatched in this arena, since that’s what you do for a living, and seem to have a lot of free time to do it here.

</p>

<p>Whatever, I’m not particularly interested in meta-discussion.</p>

<p>It seems you no longer dispute the high importance of lawsuits (and by extension, the threat of lawsuits) to any modern nation. (To the extent you ever did, of course.)</p>

[Billy_Pilgram]

<p>

I’ve never known anyone to be very enthusiastic when I’ve pointed out their silliness

</p>

<p>I wasn’t just referring to the ones directed to me. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>

t seems you no longer dispute the high importance of lawsuits

</p>

<p>I firmly believe that if the attorney population in the U.S. was cut by 50% or more, it would greatly benefit the country.</p>

<p>The same goes for the number of lawsuits. </p>

<p>So why do you think lawyers in general are so despised?</p>

[cartera45]

<p>

So why do you think lawyers in general are so despised?

</p>

<p>This wasn’t directed at me, but I don’t know people who despise lawyers, in general. Most reasonable, well informed people understand that, just as in any profession, there are some rotten apples. They, however, understand their value too. I know lots of lawyers and find them to be, on average, hard working, honest, productive and valuable members of the community. </p>

<p>

I firmly believe that if the attorney population in the U.S. was cut by 50% or more, it would greatly benefit the country.

</p>

<p>That’s just silly and ill informed. There are plenty of places in the country with a lawyer shortage. They are not available to handle the day to day needs of the public - bankruptcies, divorces/custody issues, guardianships, simple wills or tort representation.</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

I wasn’t just referring to the ones directed to me.

</p>

<p>Neither was I.</p>

<p>

I firmly believe that if the attorney population in the U.S. was cut by 50% or more, it would greatly benefit the country.</p>

<p>The same goes for the number of lawsuits.

</p>

<p>Exactly what laws would you change and how?</p>

<p>

So why do you think lawyers in general are so despised?

</p>

<p>I think it’s a few things:</p>

<p>First, the fact that what lawyers produce is so intangible. So that lawyers seem to be making a lot of money without producing any real product.</p>

<p>If somebody looks at a bridge, it’s easy to see the steel holding up the bridge and to appreciate that steelworkers and ironworkers are critical to building that bridge and keeping it standing. However, it takes a lot more insight to realize that our legal system (including lawyers) are just as critical.</p>

<p>This is the same reason there is negative sentiment towards bankers. It seems to people who lack understanding that bankers are just shuffling money around without actually producing anything.</p>

<p>Second, envy. Which actually ties into the first point. Some people have a hard time dealing with people who are succesful and lawyers have a reputation of making a lot of money.</p>

<p>Third, lawyers have a lot of power and prestige so it’s politically acceptable in our culture to attack them. It’s the same reason you see a lot of TV commercials featuring a bumbling idiot who is a white man but you hardly ever see a commercial where the dufus is a woman.</p>

<p>Last, scapegoating. A lot of people feel the need to blame problems on some group of people and lawyers are a juicy target. This sentiment is stoked up by organized interests such as the insurance industry.</p>

[Billy_Pilgram]

<p>I appreciate the direct answer, though I might subscribe to the “99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name” theory. ;)</p>

<p>I would add to your list the lowest common denominator advertising that is all pervasive: look at the billboards, back of yellow pages, daytime TV commercials, etc.</p>

<p>I disagree with the envy argument, because I think it cuts across all socioeconomic classes, and even lawyers seem to despise their peers.</p>

<p>So why do you think most lawyers are so miserable?</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

I appreciate the direct answer, though I might subscribe to the “99% of lawyers give the rest a bad name” theory.

</p>

<p>That’s ridiculous. For every report of a lawyer behaving badly, you can find a report of a doctor who behaved badly, a teacher who behaved badly, etc.</p>

<p>

I would add to your list the lowest common denominator advertising that is all pervasive: look at the billboards, back of yellow pages, daytime TV commercials, etc.

</p>

<p>That’s also ridiculous. Beer commercials are a lot more prevalent than attorney advertising. The only difference is that lawyers are profiting from peoples’ misfortune.</p>

<p>

I disagree with the envy argument, because I think it cuts across all socioeconomic classes, and even lawyers seem to despise their peers.

</p>

<p>:shrug: I’ve never met any upper or professional class people who hate lawyers as a group. </p>

<p>

So why do you think most lawyers are so miserable?

</p>

<p>I don’t think most lawyers are miserable, just a subset who happen to work in demanding, stressful positions and who don’t have a lot of control over their working conditions.</p>

<p>Anyway, I’ve answered your questions so why don’t you answer mine?</p>

<p>Exactly what laws would you change and how to reduce the number of lawyers by 50%?</p>

[Mr_Payne]

<p>Lawyers are very good at transferring value created by other groups of people to themselves. And for that they should be commended. </p>

<p>As far as I can tell the only people better than them at that particular skill are financial services employees and politicians.</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

Lawyers are very good at transferring value created by other groups of people to themselves. And for that they should be commended. </p>

<p>As far as I can tell the only people better than them at that particular skill are financial services employees and politicians.

</p>

<p>This is exactly the attitude I was talking about in post 286. At a superficial level, it appears that lawyers (and bankers) are shuffling papers around and making good money without actually creating anything. </p>

<p>When you look at a bridge or skyscraper, it’s easy to see that it required steelworkers, ironworkers and architects to build. It takes far more insight to realize that it also requires lawyers and bankers.</p>

[BigG]

<p>Yet societies without hugemongous numbers of lawyers do manage to get their stuff built.
And generally more safely and more cost effectively than in the U.S.</p>

<p>What other society trains more lawyers than engineers and physicians combined?</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

Yet societies without hugemongous numbers of lawyers do manage to get their stuff built.
And generally more safely and more cost effectively than in the U.S.

</p>

<p>Cites and examples please?</p>

[BigG]

<p>Germany, Norway, Sweden, etc.</p>

<p>These countries are even more heavily regulated than the US yet make do with far fewer lawyers.</p>

<p>This is a reference for the number of lawyers per capita with citations for source data(rare in WIKI);
[WikiAnswers</a> - What country in the world has most lawyers per capita](<a href=“http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_country_in_the_world_has_most_lawyers_per_capita]WikiAnswers”>What country in the world has most lawyers per capita? - Answers)</p>

<p>This is a 2005 reference for industrial fatalities.;
[eLCOSH</a> : The Construction Chart Book 4th Edition](<a href=“http://www.elcosh.org/en/document/54/1335/d000038/sect31.html]eLCOSH”>http://www.elcosh.org/en/document/54/1335/d000038/sect31.html)</p>

<p>The fact is that US society is coasting on “past glories” and access to very rich hunk of the planet. Our system is not sustainable. Lawyers are not the only problem but they are definitely a problem.</p>

<p>Do you want to argue building a bridge in the US is cheaper than in the cited countries?</p>

[lskinner]

<p>

These countries are even more heavily regulated than the US yet make do with far fewer lawyers.

</p>

<p>Thank you I will consider your references. I take it you cannot back up your claim about cost effectiveness?</p>