3 ms·

If there were competing courts to choose from when entering into contracts, people would pay careful attention to which ones were more fair. An unfair court wo

If there were competing courts to choose from when entering into contracts, people would pay careful attention to which ones were more fair. An unfair court would be less likely to be trusted by both parties and would not be as able to compete as a fair one. Consider what options there are when there is only one court and it is terribly unfair. And that has happened many times. People who are chronically treated unfairly would be much better off having a choice. And they and people that deal with such groups would have an incentive to choose a fair court. And this is already there to a slight degree. Many companies incorporate in Delaware because they think its more favorable. Of course, most things are governed by courts where you do business, so for most things it doesn't matter that much. In a more competitive situation, it could matter much more.

jessedhillon 14y ago
Do you people ever know what you're talking about? Don't you think you owe it to everyone to explain first why the current system of private arbitration does, or could potentially, render better justice than public courts? The private arbitration system approximates to a high degree exactly what you idiots are proposing, and yet it conforms to almost nobody's definition of justice. (except corporate lawyers'?) But no. Let's dismantle hundreds of years of common law and the notion of equality before the law, the fundamental basis of our society, because some naive, uninformed kids were convinced by a couple of half-assed comments on Reddit. Your entire argument hinges on the implicit assumption that all parties have the full and unlimited right to choose the venue in which their case will be heard. That is a complete fiction, given everything we know about human behavior and history.
- stretchwithme 14y ago
  I did not assert that all parties have full and unlimited right to choose the venue in which their case is heard. I made no assertions about today's situation. I was proposing an alternative where people could choose who they do business with based on the proposed final arbiter of the contract. People can already do this by choosing to business in a different country where a different final arbiter is in charge. I'm just proposing that sort of competition within a country. I guess today's contract arbitration could be interpreted as exactly that. But people certainly have a choice to sign or not.

jessedhillon 14y ago

Do you people ever know what you're talking about? Don't you think you owe it to everyone to explain first why the current system of private arbitration does, or could potentially, render better justice than public courts? The private arbitration system approximates to a high degree exactly what you idiots are proposing, and yet it conforms to almost nobody's definition of justice. (except corporate lawyers'?) But no. Let's dismantle hundreds of years of common law and the notion of equality before the law, the fundamental basis of our society, because some naive, uninformed kids were convinced by a couple of half-assed comments on Reddit. Your entire argument hinges on the implicit assumption that all parties have the full and unlimited right to choose the venue in which their case will be heard. That is a complete fiction, given everything we know about human behavior and history.

stretchwithme 14y ago
I did not assert that all parties have full and unlimited right to choose the venue in which their case is heard. I made no assertions about today's situation. I was proposing an alternative where people could choose who they do business with based on the proposed final arbiter of the contract. People can already do this by choosing to business in a different country where a different final arbiter is in charge. I'm just proposing that sort of competition within a country. I guess today's contract arbitration could be interpreted as exactly that. But people certainly have a choice to sign or not.