4 ms·
I think the trick is that you're using the same word for two groups. There are a ton of law school graduates, but not enough lawyers. Between the two, there is
by munificent 6y ago
I think the trick is that you're using the same word for two groups. There are a ton of law school graduates, but not enough lawyers. Between the two, there is a gating function of bar associations, getting hired at a law firm, etc. If that gate is too small, then you get the effect you observe where there are too many "lawyers" (graduates) looking for work while simultaneously not enough "lawyers" (working lawyers) available to drive down prices.
Sometimes these artificial gates are good things. They can protect consumers from low-quality products whose quality is very hard to evaluate. The market you use to "buy" a lawyer is not efficient: lawyers are no commoditized and you don't buy them frequently enough to have a good skill at evaluating them. An artificial gate like a professional association can help ensure consumers get access to a quality product, and that shitty products are prevented from entering the market and driving down the reputation of all producers.
- rmrfstar 6y agoYou've just articulated the basic economic rational for professional guilds. What inference are we supposed to draw from that, in this specific case? That things are fine? Because "consumers" aren't getting access to anything, and that's kind of the core point.