Political & Elections

Bogney · Senior Member

Unemployment Data

Abyss · Senior Member

I'm going to dissect this piece by piece - so try to keep up.

I thought that we were talking about professions suited to governance?It's a big time rant that I love to scratch scabs.

Government in a free society does not operate to "create value," but to preserve / enforce the social contract so that private citizens have the safety, security, and opportunity to "create value."I tend to agree, but in certain government types value creation is absolutely a government operation (ie: planned economies). We can argue if planned economies negate the phrase "free society", but I tend to think all economies have a bit of central planning to them.

What do engineers do to enhance the function of government other than "create value" in their capacity as private citizens?You can ask this question about any single profession or educational path. The answers would be mixed and varied, and I'm not sure any would be better/worse than another.

What qualities would make an engineer a better president or congressperson? Laws and the predictable enforcement thereof by trained lawyers and judges make it possible for engineers to "create value."Ahh, I think you and I differ significantly on how our government operates. I believe that any single profession/industry should not dominate the political discourse within our elected representatives. I believe the legal industry, above all others, is by far the most overrepresented. And I believe that has led to a sort of groupthink. It also leads to "stacking the deck" in favor of the types of laws/practices that benefit certain activities - and certainly not all those are favorable.

Are lawyers necessary for this? No, but they are necessary for that and freedom - otherwise laws are dictated to the people by the government with little or no redress by the people in Court to challenge the government - perhaps more like China. If you want the law to king rather than the king to be law, than lawyers have value government and freedom. If that freedom puts a drag on the economy, most people think it is worth it. Are value and profit seem more important to you than freedom?Stop being an idiot. Many first world economies exist without this many lawyers (at all levels of business/life).

The character in Shakespeare who said, "First, kill all of the lawyers," was a thief bent on plundering France during a wartime excursion in Henry IV. Lawyers represented order against chaos and crime, not an impediment to ordinary citizens. Anyway, your rant about economic value of lawyers versus engineers pretty much ignores function of laws in a free society.Once again, stop being an idiot. Many first world economies operate perfectly fine with far less lawyers.

Bogney · Senior Member

I thought that we were talking about professions suited to governance? Government in a free society does not operate to "create value," but to preserve / enforce the social contract so that private citizens have the safety, security, and opportunity to "create value." What do engineers do to enhance the function of government other than "create value" in their capacity as private citizens? What qualities would make an engineer a better president or congressperson? Laws and the predictable enforcement thereof by trained lawyers and judges make it possible for engineers to "create value."

Are lawyers necessary for this? No, but they are necessary for that and freedom - otherwise laws are dictated to the people by the government with little or no redress by the people in Court to challenge the government - perhaps more like China. If you want the law to king rather than the king to be law, than lawyers have value government and freedom. If that freedom puts a drag on the economy, most people think it is worth it. Are value and profit seem more important to you than freedom?

The character in Shakespeare who said, "First, kill all of the lawyers," was a thief bent on plundering France during a wartime excursion in Henry IV. Lawyers represented order against chaos and crime, not an impediment to ordinary citizens. Anyway, your rant about economic value of lawyers versus engineers pretty much ignores function of laws in a free society.

Abyss · Senior Member

Bogney wrote:

Abyss: The world needs lawyers and engineers, though perhaps not in their current proportions in society. If everybody was an engineer, there would be a lot of bad engineers and a lot of unemployed engineers, so that would not be a boon for society.

Engineers, mathemticians, and scientists have no better insight than any other group about political or social issues. They are not better people than any other group. Bill Bryson's "Brief history of Everything," a terrific book, shows how fantastic intelligence and ethics do not necessarily coincide. Famously brilliant scientists have lied, cheated, and stabbed colleagues in the back just as often as other professionals.

I have been informed - by a friend who read a book about the economic collapse, that mathematicians are largely responsible because they used their talents to create formulas for risk sharing in economics that failed to foresee how they would work in the real world. I haven't read the book, nor do I recall its name, so that tidbit is mere hearsay on hearsay, but I suspect it could be true.

Engineers probably have higher average I.Q.'s than most other groups. However, communication skills count a great deal in politics, and typically lawyers are better than engineers in communicating. Judgment is not dictated by I.Q. as brilliant people can do utterly foolish things. All the lobbying for engineers and against attorneys is merely you venting your spleen.

You *still* don't have a clue why engineers are so critical to our economy - do you? Engineers produce *value* that's practically the entire job description. If you aren't providing value for the company you are out of a job. The economic growth of the US is *heavily* dependent on the creation of new technologies and their applications within the US economy. In fact, that's the probably the biggest difference between 1st world economies and everyone else. There are significant numbers of technical professionals within the economy. South Korea/Taiwan/Singapore figured it out - to get to a first world economy you must be technically adept. Period.

Not so with lawyers - other first world economies have *far* fewer lawyers than the US and can achieve similar growth rates. I believe that much of the lawyering these days is about taking as much money as possible from other people and getting it to yourself. Straight up hijacking of value.

That's the difference and why I won't ever budge on this position. We could reduce the amount of lawyers in our economy by 80% and growth would probably go *up*. That's how damn ridiculous the situation is. We've gotten to the point where lawyers actually reduce economic growth.

Roughly 25% of the House is lawyers? Absolutely ridiculous.

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/748108.html

-- Edited by Abyss on Sunday 16th of January 2011 01:20:56 PM

BigG · Guru

Where is the "moral hazard" for Wall Street?

They have NO reason not to do it again as soon as the dust settlers. Remember the S&L crisis?

Bogney · Senior Member

Absolutely, Cannuckguy. Many of them were probably economics majors and MBAs. Thanks for the link.

While it does not seem that Li, the mathematician, is to blame in terms of any ill intent, I think the point remains the same. A brilliant math guy got ahead of the curve, and did not see where his idea was going or how it might be misused. By the time he, and others did, greed had kicked in and no one was listening to warnings because too much money was being made.

You should see "Inside Job," the documentary about the financial collapse if you haven't already. It is fantastic and maddening, and it names names. The filmmaker conducts an excellent interview - polite but penetrating - evoking responses like "this isn't a deposition, I don't have to talk to you." Before that, he confronts Ivy league economists with their conflicts of interest, errors, and role in manipulating the system to their personal benefit. There are a few heroes who saw it coming, and tried to warn others, but Larry Summers and others shouted them down. Summers is the perfect example of brilliant, but unwise and possessing questionable values caused in part by a vastly overinflated ego.

-- Edited by Bogney on Sunday 16th of January 2011 08:01:30 AM

BigG · Guru

Bogney,

President Bill was indeed a lawyer.
He did a pretty good job. I was preoccupied with the ones who did not do so well.

Except FDR and I wanted to make the "professional rich guy" comment...

-- Edited by BigG on Sunday 16th of January 2011 05:56:25 AM

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

Bogney wrote:

I have been informed - by a friend who read a book about the economic collapse, that mathematicians are largely responsible because they used their talents to create formulas for risk sharing in economics that failed to foresee how they would work in the real world. I haven't read the book, nor do I recall its name, so that tidbit is mere hearsay on hearsay, but I suspect it could be true.

This article gives you an idea what happened with sub-primes:

http://www.thestar.com/article/604033

My reading of the article is that Li ( a Chinese guy, what a surprise) produced a formula and gave a warning. They heeded his formula but ignored the warning.
Would it be appropriate to put the blame on his superiors, those ivy league MBA type?

Bogney · Senior Member

Actually, Big G, wasn't Clinton a lawyer who met Hillary at Yale Law School? What about Bush senior? I can't recall what he was but law school would not surprise me.

Bogney · Senior Member

Abyss: The world needs lawyers and engineers, though perhaps not in their current proportions in society. If everybody was an engineer, there would be a lot of bad engineers and a lot of unemployed engineers, so that would not be a boon for society.

Engineers, mathemticians, and scientists have no better insight than any other group about political or social issues. They are not better people than any other group. Bill Bryson's "Brief history of Everything," a terrific book, shows how fantastic intelligence and ethics do not necessarily coincide. Famously brilliant scientists have lied, cheated, and stabbed colleagues in the back just as often as other professionals.

I have been informed - by a friend who read a book about the economic collapse, that mathematicians are largely responsible because they used their talents to create formulas for risk sharing in economics that failed to foresee how they would work in the real world. I haven't read the book, nor do I recall its name, so that tidbit is mere hearsay on hearsay, but I suspect it could be true.

Engineers probably have higher average I.Q.'s than most other groups. However, communication skills count a great deal in politics, and typically lawyers are better than engineers in communicating. Judgment is not dictated by I.Q. as brilliant people can do utterly foolish things. All the lobbying for engineers and against attorneys is merely you venting your spleen.

Abyss · Senior Member

Poetsheart wrote:

Quote:No, we have an all knowing lawyer in charge. He's easily better than a committee engineers with advanced degrees./Quote

Yup, better than a hundred aspergery engineers! Oh, and I guess we've never had lawyers occupying the big chair before....

Liberal defense of the lawyer profession. Big surprise.

I do wonder if an engineer could figure out how to quote a post though. That's a question for the ages.

BigG · Guru

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think Gerald Ford was the latest lawyer to hold the office of President.

His predecessor Richard Nixon, was also a lawyer.

Not really outstanding chief executives...

To be fair Herbert Hoover was a mining engineer.

President W. was an MBA.

President Carter was a businessman/naval officer.

FDR was a lawyer but his real profession was "rich guy". He did pretty well considering circumstances.

-- Edited by BigG on Saturday 15th of January 2011 04:32:46 PM

-- Edited by BigG on Saturday 15th of January 2011 04:35:37 PM

Poetsheart · Senior Member

Quote:No, we have an all knowing lawyer in charge. He's easily better than a committee engineers with advanced degrees./Quote

Yup, better than a hundred aspergery engineers! Oh, and I guess we've never had lawyers occupying the big chair before.... confuse

Abyss · Senior Member

No, we have an all knowing lawyer in charge. He's easily better than a committee engineers with advanced degrees.

Canuckguy · Veteran Member

I find this interesting article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/12/larry-elliott-analysis-of-german-boom

Is this what is required for success? Have technocrats in charge? I notice the same thing with countries like China, where their Standing
Committee of the Politburo, the main decision-making body of the land, is dominated by engineers.

I was stuck by this comment, 6th one down:

Having worked in Germany for over 15yrs ,( and in the US for 5yrs.), I can say that the Germans do work hard. They also work more efficiently.
There is a willingness there to do jobs properly.
The Engineers, scientists and technicians are in control, the accountants provide an ancilliary supporting role.
When they do a job, they do it properly. No cosmetic repair jobs like here in the UK; if something is broken it's a case of tear it down and put up a proper one, as opposed to the UK method of patchwork of make-do repairs, ( which usually end up costing more in the long term ).
The Germans are willing to bite the bullet of short term cost for long term gain.
Just look at their railway network ! .. and compare that to the miserable little train-set that is operated, ( when it works at all ) in the UK.

The Germans deserve their success.

BigG · Guru

We're not the worst!

We're not the worst!

Pathetic as a football cheer, pitiful as an economic slogan for a nation.

Abyss · Senior Member

Actually, we're still better than Ireland/Portugal/Spain/Greece. True models of efficiency.

BigG · Guru

http://www.bls.gov/fls/intl_unemployment_rates_monthly.pdf

See chart 1.

We're number 1!

-- Edited by BigG on Monday 10th of January 2011 12:30:48 PM