Let Lawyers Run the Economy? Yeah, That’ll Go Well.
Stephen Green on “The Grand Unification Theory of Sucking”:
Until Team Obama gets its collective head out of our asses, all we have to look forward to is bumbling incompetence and pointless arguments. Which might be entertaining if they didn’t result in taxes, stagflation, and the Francification of a once-great nation.
When the government decides it wants to take control of the economy, this is the inevitable result.
Why it’s inevitable isn’t tough to figure out. I was at dinner with some friends Saturday night and we were talking about one of my friends’ quest for a new job. He’s a newly-minted lawyer who just found himself out of work due to the vagaries of state government funding (a subject worth addressing at another time). One of his jokes, that wasn’t quite a joke, was that lawyers aren’t particularly good at economic issues except the part of economics that help them move money into their own pockets. That’s not to say that lawyers can’t be good with basic economics (he says, hoping not to draw the ire of his blogging friends who are also lawyers), but most of them aren’t, which is why they become lawyers and not economists.
So when a bunch of lawyers start making economic policy, you know it’s not going to go well.
Other Posts of Interest:
- Who Needs Math When You’re the Lightbringer?
- Okay, GOP Leaders, It’s Game Time
- City of DC Will Spend Your Money So It Doesn’t Have To Spend Its Own
Category: The Economy and Your Money
Funny you should mention that. The Supreme Court just ruled that judges must recuse themselves when they accept campaign donations from the participants in the their cases. As you'd expect, the four in the 5-4 decision were the Justices you like. So tell me Jimmie, do you believe, like the Justices you like, that the results of a court proceeding should be bought by the election your deciding voter? And we're talking about a judge who had the highest campaign coffer in West Virginia history at $5 million. And $3 million came from one source: the plaintiff in the case. It's time to let judges be judges and not politicians. The Supremes rules in favor of that day, but your judges opposed it. Explain that to me, Jimmie.