• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

2026 Mid-Term Elections

High diesel prices are certainly a problem for commercial trucking as well as those who need large pickups for work (construction, landscaping).
But many such trucks have been bought just for daily driving and commuting because buyers think they are cool. I can't pretend that I do not feel a bit of Schadenfreude when I see e.g. F250 pavement princess and think about the driver's next fill-up.
 
Government of the people, by the lawyers, for the lawyers hasn't been so great. We need more engineers, doctors, football coaches and bus drivers in our legislature and executive. Save the lawyering for the judiciary.
You prefer laws penned by the unlettered, in short.
How is wanting more educational and professional diversity in government the same as wanting laws to be "penned by the unlettered"?

Government dominated by lawyers has two problems. One is profession-level self dealing, i.e. passing laws that benefit the lawyerly guild. For example, lawsuits are far more lucrative for lawyers in the US than in most other countries because juries can award arbitrary punitive damages that can be orders of magnitude higher than actual damages. US is also one of the most overlawyered countries in the world.
The other is that low level of educational and professional diversity has the danger of narrow thinking, where problems are seen predominately from one perspective because of the similar background of most lawmakers.
I note that the man you are paraphrasing the political principles of, Abraham Lincoln, was a working lawyer by all accounts, and a damned good one. He himself was paraphrasing another excellent orator, Theodore Parker, who studied law at Harvard before disenrolling in favor of the clergy.
I do not think bilby is saying that we should not have any lawyers in government, just that there should be more people who have studied other things and worked in other professions.

What elected lawmakers are here for is to set the content of the laws that are passed, how money should be allocated etc.
As far as actually writing the text of the law, the elected representatives don't do that themselves anyway, even if they have a law degree. That's what staffs are for.
 
Peltola is pulling ahead in Alaska!!

Not by enough at this point. My math indicates she needs about 52% of the remaining vote to get to the 50% +1 margin for the outright win, or close to that in order to win the instant runoff. This certainly isn't impossible to achieve, but while she was forecasted to win, the Dan Sullivan stuff might have cost her election day votes.
 
Government of the people, by the lawyers, for the lawyers hasn't been so great. We need more engineers, doctors, football coaches and bus drivers in our legislature and executive. Save the lawyering for the judiciary.
You prefer laws penned by the unlettered, in short.
How is wanting more educational and professional diversity in government the same as wanting laws to be "penned by the unlettered"?
Some people: We want more every day citizens to be in Government.

*Ocasio-Cortez wins primary then general election*

Some people: BOO!!!!!
 
I do not think bilby is saying that we should not have any lawyers in government, just that there should be more people who have studied other things and worked in other professions.
That's great and all, but I still am wary of a politician without any relevant specialized knowledge making key decisions about the law, economic policy, foreign policy, and the censorship of knowledge itself. Neither am I saying that all politicians should study law per se. But they should study something, or work a vocation that is somehow proximate to the work of the politician. I realize Bilby lives in a country where "politics" is a much more diaphonous and usually less consequential profession, but much of my nation's current struggles arise from functionally illiterate firebrands letting their morning radio show tell them how they ought to vote on the floor of the House of Representatives. There needs to be a middle ground here, is what I'm saying. I don't mind if someone has worked in another profession, but this outright antipathy toward people who study law as preparation for creating laws is in my view short-sighted and disrespectful of the important work they do both in and out of the governmental system, and it feeds government dysfunction when legislators are unable to communicate or collaborate with one another due to a lack of shared background knowledge. Many have suggested that understanding information is the job of "their staff", but if that's the case, personally I'd rather elect one of them directly, than have their advice filtered through someone who only half understood what their underpaid gay minions were trying to tell them.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom