Obama said the United States needs to produce more.... Forum

[09042014]

No it isn't. If an engineer made his company a million dollars, but there are 4 doods waiting to take his place at a moments notice, he'd still get paid shit.

Can the other guys also make the company a million dollars? If so, the value is not in the engineer.

I don't think you can support that leap.

[d34d9823]

No it isn't. If an engineer made his company a million dollars, but there are 4 doods waiting to take his place at a moments notice, he'd still get paid shit.

Can the other guys also make the company a million dollars? If so, the value is not in the engineer.

I don't think you can support that leap.

Value is the amount of worth that you add. If someone else achieves just as much, you have no added value with respect to that person. Now, I think you can argue that AN engineer (but not a particular one) has value, but they are fungible, but in that case the value is diluted.

[ResolutePear]

No it isn't. If an engineer made his company a million dollars, but there are 4 doods waiting to take his place at a moments notice, he'd still get paid shit.

Can the other guys also make the company a million dollars? If so, the value is not in the engineer.

I don't think you can support that leap.

Agreed.

People do business to make money - not break even.

So, if I had to hire somebody (anybody...) in a business context, it would have to be a position that will have the ultimate goal of making money than he or she would otherwise make.

Engineering overall is a good field imo because it has gobs of practicality tacked onto it - it's a profession, and requires 4 years of study. Aside from Engineering, there is accounting, nursing, and teaching(education, lulz) - among a few others I may have missed. It's *some* structure for those who need it.

Anyways, from what I see- the problem isn't the sheer number of lawyers alone. It's the number of them stacked onto the fact that ~75% of them "passed" their way through school and did not seek more than the bare minimum required of them at all levels of the systems. If we had 50,000 Harvard/Yale-caliber grads graduating per year, it wouldn't matter that there aren't "positions available" to them - they're going to succeed at life and find their space in society. I may be off base here, but that's my view on things here.

[ResolutePear]

fungible

[ResolutePear]

No it isn't. If an engineer made his company a million dollars, but there are 4 doods waiting to take his place at a moments notice, he'd still get paid shit.

Can the other guys also make the company a million dollars? If so, the value is not in the engineer.

I don't think you can support that leap.

Value is the amount of worth that you add. If someone else achieves just as much, you have no added value with respect to that person. Now, I think you can argue that AN engineer (but not a particular one) has value, but they are fungible, but in that case the value is diluted.

It's a moot point - of course there's engineers able to do the job just as good as the next when speaking from an entry-level position standpoint.

What profession does that *not* happen in?

[KibblesAndVick]

Studying economics is just a really quick way to get upset when people talk about things

[CG614]

Studying economics is just a really quick way to get upset when people talk about things

Care to expound?

[mbusch22]

I haven't read all of the posts but as finance and economics majors in undergrad, i had multiple professors stress the importance of improving our country's output of skilled scientists and mathematicians. I'm not an obama supporter in any sense, but he's right. More engineers and scientists are more important to innovation, research and development than lawyers are. And research and innovation are more important for the economy, i.e. GDP. We also had entire chapters of books dedicated to why we're falling behind China and India so quickly. A lot of it had to do with our poor math and science education. Ease up on the poli-sci art history english majors running off to law school: promote sciences. Makes sense.

And whoever said "lawyers are more brilliant than engineers"..... what?

[ResolutePear]

I haven't read all of the posts but as finance and economics majors in undergrad, i had multiple professors stress the importance of improving our country's output of skilled scientists and mathematicians. I'm not an obama supporter in any sense, but he's right. More engineers and scientists are more important to innovation, research and development than lawyers are. And research and innovation are more important for the economy, i.e. GDP. We also had entire chapters of books dedicated to why we're falling behind China and India so quickly. A lot of it had to do with our poor math and science education. Ease up on the poli-sci art history english majors running off to law school: promote sciences. Makes sense.

And whoever said "lawyers are more brilliant than engineers"..... what?

I agree with this.

I just don't understand why we are telling people to shy away from law, but not business and more specifically, accounting.

[mbusch22]

I haven't read all of the posts but as finance and economics majors in undergrad, i had multiple professors stress the importance of improving our country's output of skilled scientists and mathematicians. I'm not an obama supporter in any sense, but he's right. More engineers and scientists are more important to innovation, research and development than lawyers are. And research and innovation are more important for the economy, i.e. GDP. We also had entire chapters of books dedicated to why we're falling behind China and India so quickly. A lot of it had to do with our poor math and science education. Ease up on the poli-sci art history english majors running off to law school: promote sciences. Makes sense.

And whoever said "lawyers are more brilliant than engineers"..... what?

I agree with this.

I just don't understand why we are telling people to shy away from law, but not business and more specifically, accounting.

I'm not sure specifically why, but I do know that all of my accounting friends in undergrad had big 4 accounting firm offers by the end of their junior year. Most of my fellow finance friends are still struggling though.

[romothesavior]

He is absolutely right. In the most basic sense, awyers detract from the overall "pie" of the American economy while engineers add to it. This isn't to say that lawyers don't play an important role or that we don't need them. But he's right.

[KibblesAndVick]

Studying economics is just a really quick way to get upset when people talk about things

Care to expound?

When people say things that go against basic economic theory it makes you less likely to have a calm and measured reaction and more likely to do this. You're also likely to become frustrated when people who have no apparent background or expertise in economics or econometrics give their two cents without referencing any data, research, plausible theory, or individual who would know what they're talking about.

I don't mean to sound like an asshole about it (although I probably do) or suggest that I'm an authority. It's just sort of like when you do a lot of research about law school and then talk to someone you meet who's going to the local TTT because they were really interested in international law during undergrad.

I just reread what I wrote and I sound like a huge douche but what the hell, I already wrote it.

[CG614]

Studying economics is just a really quick way to get upset when people talk about things

Care to expound?

When people say things that go against basic economic theory it makes you less likely to have a calm and measured reaction and more likely to do this. You're also likely to become frustrated when people who have no apparent background or expertise in economics or econometrics give their two cents without referencing any data, research, plausible theory, or individual who would know what they're talking about.

I don't mean to sound like an asshole about it (although I probably do) or suggest that I'm an authority. It's just sort of like when you do a lot of research about law school and then talk to someone you meet who's going to the local TTT because they were really interested in international law during undergrad.

I just reread what I wrote and I sound like a huge douche but what the hell, I already wrote it.

I don't feel like anything said in this thread has been sacrilegiously wrong. The US economy would be better off with more science and math majors, however the incentives are not in place to create them. When 3 additional years of schooling can net you $160K starting, it is hard to argue with those that take the gamble, provided they take all the factors into account (which most do not).

[romothesavior]

Careful, you are treading into snobby a-hole economics major territory.

[ResolutePear]

Careful, you are treading into snobby a-hole economics major territory.

That thread is so fail I couldn't even find the energy to post ridiculousness in it.

[romothesavior]

Careful, you are treading into snobby a-hole economics major territory.

That thread is so fail I couldn't even find the energy to post ridiculousness in it.

My favorite part:

The law market is extremely heterogeneous when it comes to human capital and marginal productivity. Under neoclassical assumptions, which for the moment lets assume are true, wages represent marginal productivity. High ranking T1 students are far more productive than high ranking T4 students. Both students will find jobs, assuming labor clearing markets, but at different wage rates.

*A liquidity trap, with a jobless recovery, makes the assumption of labor clearing markets not hold. In the short run employment is artificially high due to cyclical problems. Under normal circumstances the neoclassical model is correct.

[Nulli Secundus]

Careful, you are treading into snobby a-hole economics major territory.

That thread is so fail I couldn't even find the energy to post ridiculousness in it.

My favorite part:

The law market is extremely heterogeneous when it comes to human capital and marginal productivity. Under neoclassical assumptions, which for the moment lets assume are true, wages represent marginal productivity. High ranking T1 students are far more productive than high ranking T4 students. Both students will find jobs, assuming labor clearing markets, but at different wage rates.

*A liquidity trap, with a jobless recovery, makes the assumption of labor clearing markets not hold. In the short run employment is artificially high due to cyclical problems. Under normal circumstances the neoclassical model is correct.

Where is that gif from? I mean the original movie or whatever it is, where can I find it? Seems hilariously awful.

[Hypo, Esq.]

Obama is right. Too many lawyers. And it ain't stopping - over 140,000 law students in the U.S. - that's almost 50,000 brand new lawyers every year.
On the other hand - you have to get your bachelors before law school - i wonder how many of these 140,000 are engineers?

[things fall apart]

I think its a natural cycle in the market. As strictly no training in economics isnt it something like this for the legal market:

1. Demand running close to supply
2. Lucrative $$$ behind demand, increasing the supply
3. Oversupply
4. Doom and gloom (we are here now)
5. Market correction to around step 2.5

I think while its better to be on and/or past step 3, the majority of people don't decide to go to law school when they are seniors in college. A lot of people have this in their head in high school and the fact that we are just seeing the articles ("Is Law School a Losing Game") means the market will correct itself, albeit, with at least 5 more classes pushing the enrollment total.

[Plan2008]

God made law so that English majors could have jobs too.

[romothesavior]

Where is that gif from? I mean the original movie or whatever it is, where can I find it? Seems hilariously awful.

More like awfully hilarious.

And idk... I just stole it from another poster.

[Sogui]

The best thing a lawyer will ever do for this country is find a way to reduce the number of lawyers that our system needs.

By and large we are just a really expensive transaction cost

[D. H2Oman]

Obama is right. Too many lawyers. And it ain't stopping - over 140,000 law students in the U.S. - that's almost 50,000 brand new lawyers every year.
On the other hand - you have to get your bachelors before law school - i wonder how many of these 140,000 are engineers?

Meh, probably like 20,000 of them will never become lawyers.

[ResolutePear]

The best thing a lawyer will ever do for this country is find a way to reduce the number of lawyers that our system needs.

By and large we are just a really expensive transaction cost

What we need is to put a stop to outsourcing work. You think we have it tough? Tell that to an engineer who got replaced by a Chinese one for 10% of his wages.

[D. H2Oman]

The best thing a lawyer will ever do for this country is find a way to reduce the number of lawyers that our system needs.

By and large we are just a really expensive transaction cost

What we need is to put a stop to outsourcing work. You think we have it tough? Tell that to an engineer who got replaced by a Chinese one for 10% of his wages.

Wrong poster is wrong.