Liberals and Biglaw Forum

[ajmanyjah]

50 percent of the us pays no income tax because they are fucking poor, united states has become one of the worst countries in terms of income distribution.

Why should income distribution matter? How many people are poor should matter, ie the poverty rate should be minimized, but why does it matter if the uber rich are uber uber rich?

The market will charge what the market can bear. If rich people cause this equilibrium to change, it becomes worse to be poor.

Just look at the cost of PBR in a bar after after hipster scum with trust funds showed up.

[chicoalto0649]

Liberals like to make money too, what's so hard to grasp?

/thread

[GettingReady2010]

The main reason I'm against excessive taxation is because it has been demonstrated time and time again that a regulated economy simply does not work. I mean how many examples do people need to see that while in college textbooks and in theory a highly regulated economy is a good idea, but when you apply it to reality it just does not work. No matter how much people wish the world worked that way, it never will.

Prove that all regulated economies do not work. Western Germany seems to be pretty well off, China is improving...

Ok, I'll bite. I'll give you that Germany is doing outstanding. I'll be completely honest and unbiased and tell you that I have no idea why Germany is thriving. I've never been able to figure it out. With that said, it is an anomaly - I urge you to point to one other single country in the EU that is an economic powerhouse like Germany is. When people talk about the EU bailing out Greece, what they mean is Germany is going to have to foot the bill. No other social democracy in the EU has the means to help. Yeah, they can do a little, but nothing substantial. Sure, there are many countries (including Scandinavian countries) that are doing well, but none of them are setting the standard. Like I mentioned previously, these countries are not attracting business. If you're an MNC, are you really going to be salivating at the chance to to open shop is Denmark?

Take a look at the former Soviet Bloc (i.e.Ukraine). The vast majority of these countries have embraced capitalism big time are absolutely obsessed with it. Reason being, they have improved their standard of living immensely. They're certainly not where they are because they regulate big business.

And there really is only one nation with an unregulated economy...Somalia

Obviously, with zero "regulation" whatsoever a state would cease to exist. I was clearly referring to social democracies.

As to your point about China, China is a communism with "Chinese characteristics," which essentially means that it is a capitalism. China epitomizes wealth inequality. The one reason it began doing so well is because it is deregulating it's economy more and more. Why do you think it started doing so well in the past half century?

[Oban]

The most socialized countries on earth(eg scandavia)(i don't consider china to be socialist) have some of the best standards of living/qualities of life. Sure they have slow GDP grow (ZOMG!) and such, but that doesn't detract from their overall success.

Germany is an economic powerhouse because they value and understand the importance of a highly paid workforce(car-chemical-tech)State controlled business(Deutsche Bahn, which turns a profit yearly), and a strong social safety net, in which the wealthy support the unemployed and impoverished when necessary. Hell in Germany many companies have cooperative structures rather than dictatorship lead companies like we enjoy here in the united states.

Switzerland, a country with a similar social/economic policy is doing well too, albeit their economy has always been dependent on outside trade/business due to their small size and geography.

[GettingReady2010]

The most socialized countries on earth(eg scandavia)(i don't consider china to be socialist) have some of the best standards of living/qualities of life. Sure they have slow GDP grow (ZOMG!) and such, but that doesn't detract from their overall success at mediocrity.

Germany is an economic powerhouse because they value and understand the importance of a highly paid workforce(car-chemical-tech)State controlled business(Deutsche Bahn, which turns a profit yearly), and a strong social safety net, in which the wealthy support the unemployed and impoverished when necessary. Hell in Germany many companies have cooperative structures rather than dictatorship lead companies like we enjoy here in the united states.

Switzerland, a country with a similar social/economic policy is doing well too, albeit their economy has always been dependent on outside trade/business due to their small size and geography.

Germany is an economic powerhouse because they value and understand the importance of a highly paid workforce(car-chemical-tech)State controlled business(Deutsche Bahn, which turns a profit yearly), and a strong social safety net, in which the wealthy support the unemployed and impoverished when necessary. Hell in Germany many companies have cooperative structures rather than dictatorship lead companies like we enjoy here in the united states.[/quote]

So, what did does this say? If it's this simple, why aren't all the other highly regulated countries in the EU doing even half as well?

On separate note, many (most?) of these social democracies are moving at least little back towards the center. Yes, they are by no means trying to become like the U.S. economically, but they are seeing that socialism taken to the extreme is not conducive to growth.

The problem is that on an emotional and theoretical level, redistributive policies seem like a great idea. Who wouldn't want things to be more equal while also rapidly prospering. However, when you turn to facts, logic, and reality, these principles are nothing more than wishful thinking. It seems like many people fresh out of college think that they can tax people as much as they want, and business will continue to be extremely aggressive. They refuse to ever admit that it gets to a point where people will not continue to expand more and more. I'm not saying that we should suspend any and all regulation. What I'm getting at is that there is a happy medium. It's not all or nothing.

[Oban]

My point is the socialist countries don't need/want to expand per the standards of healthy us growth. It's one of the reasons they are so xenophobic about immigration. Switzerland and Dernmark have some of the strictest immigration standards in the world.

Sure If i lived in Denmark, the high taxes and slow growth might suck, but thats easily out weighed by the

1. Guaranteed Employment
2. Government Pension Plans
3. Month of Vacation(by law)
4. 6 months maternity leave w/ pay
5. Free Education
6. Free Health Care
7. Low Crime Rate

In short, it's a much better life than the bottom 60 percent have in the united states. For the rich and such it's not paradise.

I think the real answer is a modern hybrid of socialism and capitalism in the United States. Follow Germany and switzerland's example. I think the Welfare state/Nordic model is a little extreme to implement here overnight, but it's worth striving for

[12262010]

my desire to make bank trumps my political views.

that was easy.

[ajmanyjah]

"Ok, I'll bite. I'll give you that Germany is doing outstanding. I'll be completely honest and unbiased and tell you that I have no idea why Germany is thriving. I've never been able to figure it out. With that said, it is an anomaly - I urge you to point to one other single country in the EU that is an economic powerhouse like Germany is."

Obviously, size is an issue as it comes to this. But disregarding size, Denmark, Switzerland, THE NETHERLANDS!!!, Sweden, Finland, Norway...

After living in Canada, I'll tell you a lot of it has to do with the labor mobility socialized healthcare gives you (countries like Greece, Italy have social issues that reduce this) and the ability to go take a risk, open a business, etc

A lot of it has to do with the ease of opening businesses (easiest in the world, something like 6 days to do so in Denmark) and a lack of tax evasion (problems in Greece, Italy, Portugal)

"As to your point about China, China is a communism with "Chinese characteristics," which essentially means that it is a capitalism. China epitomizes wealth inequality. The one reason it began doing so well is because it is deregulating it's economy more and more. Why do you think it started doing so well in the past half century?"

Cheap labor and good roads (socialized roads?)...labor unions are owned by the government, which also owns capital, so for 30 years they kept the masses in poverty by undermining worker's rights.

And China is in no way deregulated, go live there like I did, and realize that EVERY SINGLE building project has to be greased with free dinners, drinks, and karaoke whores to the local government, imported cars are taxed at 100% excise rates, exports are given huge tax rebates, the entire weakness of the yuan itself is a government run market distortion.

The takeaway ideas, kids, is that market MECHANISMS are great, but the idea of a "free market" is a hilarious farce done by liberal arts educated eternal students who simply do not know how to use analytic techniques and simply made up some idea of a "rational consumer" when every actual empirical study of economic behavior simply disproves it. Economics is a normative field that is as applicable to the real world as phrenology.

[ajmanyjah]

The problem is that on an emotional and theoretical level, redistributive policies seem like a great idea. Who wouldn't want things to be more equal while also rapidly prospering. However, when you turn to facts, logic, and reality, these principles are nothing more than wishful thinking. It seems like many people fresh out of college think that they can tax people as much as they want, and business will continue to be extremely aggressive. They refuse to ever admit that it gets to a point where people will not continue to expand more and more. I'm not saying that we should suspend any and all regulation. What I'm getting at is that there is a happy medium. It's not all or nothing.

Great Strawman.

Oh and let me point out, unemployment in Denmark and the Netherlands are fare far (and were also) lower than here...and if you strip out the effects of population growth and fertility rates, European growth (especially outside the Mediterranean) is far better than it seems

[GettingReady2010]

I love how all of you look at social democracies in Europe and automatically assume that that the same can be achieved in the U.S. If you haven't noticed, there are just a couple difference between the U.S. and a European country like Portugal.

This is basically like comparing NYC to a suburb of Chicago.

[Iuvo]

Lawyers are overwhelmingly liberal. Structuring IPOs and/or litigation/arbitration between giant companies doesn't really involve your politics too often.

Yeah, until they start working dehumanizing hours and the government takes half their paycheck and redistributes it.

Yeah, when the don't really change at all since, gasp, it turns out lawyers are still overwhelmingly liberal. 160k before taxes and bonuses = 100k in most places (assuming big law). Plenty to live on, most people don't really care for more, even with loans.

[GettingReady2010]

Lawyers are overwhelmingly liberal. Structuring IPOs and/or litigation/arbitration between giant companies doesn't really involve your politics too often.

Yeah, until they start working dehumanizing hours and the government takes half their paycheck and redistributes it.

Yeah, when the don't really change at all since, gasp, it turns out lawyers are still overwhelmingly liberal. 160k before taxes and bonuses = 100k in most places (assuming big law). Plenty to live on, most people don't really care for more, even with loans.

Where exactly do you live where people don't care for more?

[Iuvo]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

[GettingReady2010]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

People would kill to make 100k per year. You said that people "don't care for more."

[Iuvo]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

People would kill to make 100k per year. You said that people "don't care for more."

Most people are content with 100k (actually, a recent thread linking to a study showed they were content with 70k), which renders your assertion that lawyers become conservative after working inhumane hours and having their paychecks cut false.

[GettingReady2010]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

People would kill to make 100k per year. You said that people "don't care for more."

Most people are content with 100k (actually, a recent thread linking to a study showed they were content with 70k), which renders your assertion that lawyers become conservative after working inhumane hours and having their paychecks cut false.

Ok, this is not getting through to you. There is a big difference between between being "content" and "not caring for more."

[articulably suspect]

I think a more interesting discussion would be centered around progressive/lliberal lawyers working in law enforcement capacities.

[GettingReady2010]

I think a more interesting discussion would be centered around progressive/lliberal lawyers working in law enforcement capacities.

As an AUSA, in the DA's office, FBI, etc.?

[Iuvo]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

People would kill to make 100k per year. You said that people "don't care for more."

Most people are content with 100k (actually, a recent thread linking to a study showed they were content with 70k), which renders your assertion that lawyers become conservative after working inhumane hours and having their paychecks cut false.

Ok, this is not getting through to you. There is a big difference between between being "content" and "not caring for more."

In practice, it's the same, Socrates.

[rando]

Um, most people would be perfectly content with $100 k to spend per year.

People would kill to make 100k per year. You said that people "don't care for more."

Most people are content with 100k (actually, a recent thread linking to a study showed they were content with 70k), which renders your assertion that lawyers become conservative after working inhumane hours and having their paychecks cut false.

Ok, this is not getting through to you. There is a big difference between between being "content" and "not caring for more."

Not to mention ITE everything is relative. Wait till things get good and see how many people are "content" or "don't care for more" 70k.

[articulably suspect]

I think a more interesting discussion would be centered around progressive/lliberal lawyers working in law enforcement capacities.

As an AUSA, in the DA's office, FBI, etc.?

Yes, I think I would experience more internal struggle (or at least as much as I would working Biglaw, but not for the same reasons) working for certain DA's offices, for example.

[GettingReady2010]

I think a more interesting discussion would be centered around progressive/lliberal lawyers working in law enforcement capacities.

As an AUSA, in the DA's office, FBI, etc.?

Yes, I think I would experience more internal struggle (or at least as much as I would working Biglaw, but not for the same reasons) working for certain DA's offices, for example.

Edit: I didn't answer your question. What type of internal struggle are you referring to?

[romothesavior]

OP reminds me of this:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/1 ... earchterm=

[articulably suspect]

I think a more interesting discussion would be centered around progressive/lliberal lawyers working in law enforcement capacities.

As an AUSA, in the DA's office, FBI, etc.?

Yes, I think I would experience more internal struggle (or at least as much as I would working Biglaw, but not for the same reasons) working for certain DA's offices, for example.

Edit: I didn't answer your question. What type of internal struggle are you referring to?

As in where my heart is versus where my office's policies and political agendas are, not to mention my "would-be" obligation to the people to carry out said policies and agendas of the elected DA, like it or not. One obvious example would be pushing for a sentence of death, when one is opposed to the death penalty. That isn't to say that conservatives aren’t anti-death penalty, though.

Edit: I believe most DA's offices will ask you if you would have a problem with the whole death penalty thing pre-employment, in offices that do pursue such sentences.

[GettingReady2010]

OP reminds me of this:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/1 ... earchterm=

LOL. I also like these from that episode:

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/103809

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/154825