Last edited by The_Shooman (2009-05-14 08:02:07)
Produce or sort of shuffle around with one hand in that pipe fitter's pocket?
Ofcourse lawyers don't actually produce any wealth, they only take it from those who have earned it. What exactly does a lawyer produce other than BS, and references to clauses in a contract. Its not rocket science, but you do need a rich mummy and daddy to subsidise you for four years, or a rather generous student loan.
I can assure you a coded welder is capable of supporting a vast entourage through his skill with the electrode. A much bigger organisation than that which a comparable lawyer could support. When it comes to the creation of jobs and wealth, its welder 1 and lawyer 0.
Ofcourse when it comes to individual wealth, general avarice, sneekiness and inability to give a straight, definitive answer, its welder 0, lawyer 5.
The hard sciences, such as engineering and physics is where the real evolutionary technological breakthroughs and the production of wealth takes place. Of course, this all sounds like too much hard work to today's students who much prefer touchy feely degrees in media studies and a guaranteed position at the McDonalds drive-thru.
Last edited by The Ace Face (2009-05-14 15:07:36)
I'm not sure what "today" and "yesterday" really are, but engineering enrollment in this decade is at near record levels:
http://www.ewc-online.org/data/enrollments_data.asp
Plenty of people enter science and engineering programs.
Though, as a percentage of all degrees I suppose we are no longer in those halcyon days of the 60s:
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf08321/pdf/tab1.pdf
Lest anyone think this thread a blanket condemnation of law practise; no, not by me.
There are good lawyers and execrable, just like pipe fitters, burger flippers and porn actresses.
The condemnation comes when lawyers think they are Clarence Darrow , the burger flippers
a cordon blue chef and the porn actress another Meryll Streep.
Most people can spot the differnce, even behind welder's goggles.
Last edited by Chris Kavanaugh (2009-05-14 18:51:10)
Two (highly selective) salary comparisons:
1. The CIA agent who died in Afghanistan guarding a prison in 2001 was being paid "less than $50,000". He left behind two kids (his wife pre-deceased him). His travel expenses were paid by taxpayers, presumably.
2. The rookie co-pilot of the plane that crashed this winter south of Buffalo was paid $16,000. She left behind her parents with whom she was living to cut costs, which I imagine was necessary on that salary.
Obviously he was a veteran agent and she was a rookie, but both had serious adult jobs with serious adult responsibilities. Both, I suggest, were underpaid for the work they did and the price they paid adding value to our society/economy (one by making us safer, the other by humping our fat asses to our next meeting).
*****
When it comes to the lawyers versus plumbers debate, we need more plumbers than lawyers, unless modern science (or evolution) can create humans that don't need to shit. If that happened we'd have a lot of unemployed plumbers, but I guess the lawyers could produce enough shit to keep the plumbers employed, so everyone would be happy doing what they do best...
I think that's called the "circle of life".
Last edited by Voltaire's Bastard (2009-05-14 17:43:19)
Reading and responding to lots of words, little intellectual content, poor arguments... that's a waste of any engineer's time
Last edited by The_Shooman (2009-05-14 21:39:16)