3 ms·

> My challenge is why is this relevant? We pay anesthesiologists a lot more than baristas, we pay lawyers more than teachers, we pay civil engineers more than a

> My challenge is why is this relevant? We pay anesthesiologists a lot more than baristas, we pay lawyers more than teachers, we pay civil engineers more than accountants. It’s about labor markets and paying the price an individual will accept vs their other opportunities given their skill set and the market demand. Maybe it's relevant because it's yet another example showing that leaving wages up to the market isn't creating good results. There's no doubt in my mind that a society which paid teachers more than lawyers would be a better society than the one we have.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
Who do you propose dictates wages by profession? We need far more teachers than lawyers and the skills required to, say, teach second graders, are not as advanced as those required to pass the bar exam. I’m all for public support of teachers, but it’s easy to say you don’t value a lawyer until you need one. Having fewer and worse lawyers means we will have worse laws and more injustice. To wit, public defenders make on average slightly less than a teacher. Given the quality of justice you can expect from a public defender, and the severe lack of them, is this a positive outcome? If you were accused of something falsely would you voluntarily use the public defender vs hiring the best you can afford?
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  > Who do you propose dictates wages by profession? Why do you assume suddenly that I'm proposing dictatorship? This is a straw man. Laws regulating the ability of corporations to bust unions, along with rules on fair distribution of profits including limits on highest-to-lowest compensation ratios, would go a long way to ensure people who are integral to companies aren't always getting shafted because people higher up oh-so-surprisingly decide to compensate themselves instead of their workers. > We need far more teachers than lawyers and the skills required to, say, teach second graders, are not as advanced as those required to pass the bar exam. No one will pass the bar exam if they haven't mastered the skills taught to second graders. Lawyers can't exist without teachers. > To wit, public defenders make on average slightly less than a teacher. Given the quality of justice you can expect from a public defender, and the severe lack of them, is this a positive outcome? The problem you're describing is one of disparity: it's not just that public defenders are paid so little, it's also that prosecutors are paid so much. Public defenders are an outlier: a huge number of lawyers are corporate lawyers who create an environment of caveat emptor which is hugely destructive in our society. > If you were accused of something falsely would you voluntarily use the public defender vs hiring the best you can afford? Have you considered that I might not selfishly be thinking only of myself, and that I might want a legal system that is just even for people who are poor? The argument you're making only appeals to rich sociopaths who don't care about the poor.
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    Ok, but I don’t see the things you proposing changing supply and demand dynamics, but rather controlling for absurd outliers and gaming of the system by management. I’m down for that. But it doesn’t change the dynamics I outlined. Prosecutors don’t make more than defenders. They typically make exactly the same. A quick Kagi would confirm this. I’m not sure how you’re getting to diagnosing me with a psychiatric disorder. I would be thrilled if the public funding model paid public defenders and teachers substantially more. But you would still seek the best lawyer you could afford, and that’s not my fault or a psychiatric condition on my part. That’s human nature. Thus lawyers are paid a lot. When you need a good lawyer, you pay for a good lawyer.
kbelder 3y ago
>There's no doubt in my mind that a society which paid teachers more than lawyers would be a better society than the one we have. I have no doubt it would be much worse.

fnordpiglet 3y ago

Who do you propose dictates wages by profession? We need far more teachers than lawyers and the skills required to, say, teach second graders, are not as advanced as those required to pass the bar exam. I’m all for public support of teachers, but it’s easy to say you don’t value a lawyer until you need one. Having fewer and worse lawyers means we will have worse laws and more injustice. To wit, public defenders make on average slightly less than a teacher. Given the quality of justice you can expect from a public defender, and the severe lack of them, is this a positive outcome? If you were accused of something falsely would you voluntarily use the public defender vs hiring the best you can afford?

kerkeslager 3y ago
> Who do you propose dictates wages by profession? Why do you assume suddenly that I'm proposing dictatorship? This is a straw man. Laws regulating the ability of corporations to bust unions, along with rules on fair distribution of profits including limits on highest-to-lowest compensation ratios, would go a long way to ensure people who are integral to companies aren't always getting shafted because people higher up oh-so-surprisingly decide to compensate themselves instead of their workers. > We need far more teachers than lawyers and the skills required to, say, teach second graders, are not as advanced as those required to pass the bar exam. No one will pass the bar exam if they haven't mastered the skills taught to second graders. Lawyers can't exist without teachers. > To wit, public defenders make on average slightly less than a teacher. Given the quality of justice you can expect from a public defender, and the severe lack of them, is this a positive outcome? The problem you're describing is one of disparity: it's not just that public defenders are paid so little, it's also that prosecutors are paid so much. Public defenders are an outlier: a huge number of lawyers are corporate lawyers who create an environment of caveat emptor which is hugely destructive in our society. > If you were accused of something falsely would you voluntarily use the public defender vs hiring the best you can afford? Have you considered that I might not selfishly be thinking only of myself, and that I might want a legal system that is just even for people who are poor? The argument you're making only appeals to rich sociopaths who don't care about the poor.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  Ok, but I don’t see the things you proposing changing supply and demand dynamics, but rather controlling for absurd outliers and gaming of the system by management. I’m down for that. But it doesn’t change the dynamics I outlined. Prosecutors don’t make more than defenders. They typically make exactly the same. A quick Kagi would confirm this. I’m not sure how you’re getting to diagnosing me with a psychiatric disorder. I would be thrilled if the public funding model paid public defenders and teachers substantially more. But you would still seek the best lawyer you could afford, and that’s not my fault or a psychiatric condition on my part. That’s human nature. Thus lawyers are paid a lot. When you need a good lawyer, you pay for a good lawyer.

kbelder 3y ago

>There's no doubt in my mind that a society which paid teachers more than lawyers would be a better society than the one we have. I have no doubt it would be much worse.