Lawyers: they'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes [Archive]

View Full Version : Lawyers: they'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes

jrandom

24th February 2012, 18:03

This rant triggered by http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/6476992/350-000-to-remove-Occupy-Auckland.

Don't blame the protesters (silly though they may be) for that waste of public money. Blame the lawyers who connive throughout their incestuous industry to charge hourly rates that bear no relation whatsoever to the actual value or difficulty of the work they do.

Solicitors do not have mystical capabilities that the rest of us lack. They are simply professional form-filler-outers and regurgitators of books that other people have written. The amount of training they undertake and their general worth to society should result in rates of pay in a ballpark with what other tradespeople with similar quantities of training and experience can charge.

An electrician with three years of training and ten years of industry experience will cost you $80 an hour.

Yet a lawyer with three years of training can somehow spend ten years filling out land-transfer forms and kissing arse, and then move into a corner office and start charging $450 an hour.

I believe the rottenness in this corner of society to be an unfortunate emergent behaviour of the underlying way the world works. Lawyers are in a position to strangle everyone else, and so they do.

But I never cease to be amazed that people are prepared to be a part of it while keeping a straight face.

Human nature can be a sorry-arsed thing.

And if any partner in any posh CBD law firm is reading this post, know that your wealth is ill-gotten. You are a parasite.

I challenge any cunt out there to disagree with me.

:sunny:

neels

24th February 2012, 18:14

*hopes hdc spots this thread* :corn:

Coldrider

24th February 2012, 18:40

Security looks to be a a good winna.

Ronin

24th February 2012, 18:40

I challenge any cunt out there to disagree with me.

:sunny:

I disagree somewhat.

And yes, I am a cunt.

scissorhands

24th February 2012, 18:40

Alongside them you need advertising and marketing, real estate agents, funeral parlours, rest home companies and and

James Deuce

24th February 2012, 18:49

Given my experiences with lawyers over the last year, I'd be much happier with a lawyer who'd openly laugh in my face with malignant glee at thought of being allowed start working on just one of the issues I find myself beset with.

oldrider

24th February 2012, 18:51

Why do Universities keep on churning lawyers out year after year when there is a gross oversupply of them anyway!

What do they do with their time? .... Make work and create a climate of crime and unenforceable laws that needs their specific high cost interpretation!

Crime seems to be a major growth industry in this country .... have you ever wondered why?

Ministers of the church would not exist without sinners .... why would they want to be rid of them?

Lawyers depend on crime, social and legal confusion .... why would they want it otherwise?

Parliament is full of people who need to keep the negative things of society alive and well, ever noticed who and what make up the majority? :mellow:

Might not be true but it's food for thought just the same! :shifty:

Coldrider

24th February 2012, 19:05

Most of them settle for the corporate sector, for a reasonable salary.......if they can survive the politics. The rest have a baby and stay home.

ellipsis

24th February 2012, 19:09

I challenge any cunt out there to disagree with me.

:sunny:

...cant disagree with facts....

Bikemad

24th February 2012, 19:17

Lawyers: they'll be first against the wall when the revolution comes

any chance we can start with those telefuckinmarketerpricks and work our way up to lawyer types?:ar15:

James Deuce

24th February 2012, 19:36

any chance we can start with those telefuckinmarketerpricks and work our way up to lawyer types?:ar15:

No. They're people trying to earn a living by working. The company they work for will be run by a lawyer though.

Usarka

24th February 2012, 19:37

A lawyer just won me $20k for a $3k investment........

Coldrider

24th February 2012, 19:40

A lawyer just won me $20k for a $3k investment........are you sure it wasn't $60K ?

Smifffy

24th February 2012, 19:41

http://youtu.be/FCMHmDnfD6I
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/FCMHmDnfD6I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Usarka

24th February 2012, 19:42

are you sure it wasn't $60K ?

Fuck i hope so. Are you my lawyer?

Edit: point well made.....

jrandom

24th February 2012, 19:42

A lawyer just won me $20k for a $3k investment........

Don't you mean that someone just paid you $20K that they owed you and a lawyer took 15% of it?

Usarka

24th February 2012, 19:50

Don't you mean that someone just paid you $20K that they owed you and a lawyer took 15% of it?

yeah, the government owed me so a lawyer took my money......

Coldrider

24th February 2012, 20:07

Don't you mean that someone just paid you $20K that they owed you and a lawyer took 15% of it?no, a lawyer took $3K off 100 clients, and made one a winner.:innocent:

jellywrestler

24th February 2012, 20:14

An electrician with three years of training and ten years of industry experience will cost you $80 an hour.

fuck, i've been on the tools since 1979 and only charge $45hr, still only had one job all week

mashman

24th February 2012, 20:31

but without lawyers, who's gonna outsmart the corporate tap dancers? or are we gonna go old school on their activities?

Usarka

24th February 2012, 20:37

but without lawyers, who's gonna outsmart the corporate tap dancers? or are we gonna go old school on their activities?

The lawyers help the corporates do the tap dance.

It's a win-win for all. Except if you're not a lawyer.

mashman

24th February 2012, 20:49

The lawyers help the corporates do the tap dance.

It's a win-win for all. Except if you're not a lawyer.

Sounds like an unawe inspiring bun fight where the buns get eaten and there isn't a fight. Maybe I should go become a lawyer

Usarka

24th February 2012, 20:51

Sounds like an unawe inspiring bun fight where the buns get eaten and there isn't a fight. Maybe I should go become a lawyer

Nah, you have a conscience.....

mashman

24th February 2012, 20:53

Nah, you have a conscience.....

I'm sure I can get rid of it... we all have our price :shit:

SPman

24th February 2012, 21:44

Integrity - I like that in a person - and, I'm prepared to pay for it!

flyingcrocodile46

24th February 2012, 22:02

I have heard we are second (behind the US) in the world per capita for use of lawyers. We seem to be fostering a litigious society with the Govt underwriting most of it through subsidising legal representation, investigation costs, tribunals etc etc. Generally to no good effect and more often than not driving two to ten times more expenditure by other parties who are involved in the litigation.. It only serves to suck money out of the community that then can't be spent on more productive things.

Only need to look at the money that gets spent (in total) by all the parties involved in leaky home claims through the taxpayer funded WHRS tribunal. Typically 2 to 5 times the value of settlements is spent on lawyers and experts by the combatants before the settlement is agreed and then has to be paid. It really is a unbelievable waste of fucking time and money. Pity we can't figure out a way to get everyone to agree to chip in and fix the bloody things in a fashion that sees 100% of the money spent by everyone going only toward the cost of fixing the physical problems.

pete376403

24th February 2012, 22:14

They've been like that forever; eg "first thing we do is kill all the lawyers" - Shakespeare, or "Jarndyce and Jarndyce" - Dickens.

And they'll be the only thing, along with cockroaches, left after a nuclear war.

Big Dave

24th February 2012, 22:49

It would be interesting to see how quickly all this contempt is forgotten if any of you end up actually needing a good Lawyer.

mashman

24th February 2012, 23:00

It would be interesting to see how quickly all this contempt is forgotten if any of you end up actually needing a good Lawyer.

I didn't feel like I got my 13k's worth... they also tried to slide a few more expensive lawyers on to the case without explaining that they where more expensive than the initial lawyer we were dealing with... so we got some money back. Not impressed at all. Actually, fuckin dodgy springs to mind, filthy dodgy.

Edit: praps milking a job for all it's worth is what makes them good lawyers?

Big Dave

24th February 2012, 23:10

Maybe you're just mad.

mashman

24th February 2012, 23:13

More disappointed.

jrandom

25th February 2012, 01:39

It would be interesting to see how quickly all this contempt is forgotten if any of you end up actually needing a good Lawyer.

I believe this situation to be purely hypothetical. I've never seen a lawyer add value to any private individual's situation, myself. I've only seen them rubber-stamp things and clip the ticket.

Even in a case where a lawyer was unavoidably necessary, my fundamental issue with the rates they charge still stands.

James Deuce

25th February 2012, 06:08

It would be interesting to see how quickly all this contempt is forgotten if any of you end up actually needing a good Lawyer.

It's not forgotten. It simply grows with each interaction.

Usarka

25th February 2012, 07:49

It would be interesting to see how quickly all this contempt is forgotten if any of you end up actually needing a good Lawyer.

My lawyer even said to me "it's not fair that you have to pay to get your money".

HenryDorsetCase

25th February 2012, 08:18

HenryDorsetCase

25th February 2012, 08:21

I remember reading the rsults of some survey, and the results were along the lines of "people hate lawyers, except their own lawyer".

Now I know how scummy and rastuscat and red mermaid and all the po po feel when they get lambasted by fuckwits on the internet. They dont give a fuck either.

blackdog

25th February 2012, 08:32

What sterling service for the community do you perform ?

When he recently moved to Taupo he did Wellington a huge favour.

jrandom

25th February 2012, 08:38

I disagree with you. And get fucked.

Convincing argument. You're not exactly winning hearts and minds left and right here, lawyerman.

What sterling service for the community do you perform that you can cast aspersions willy nilly?

I don't know if you could call it sterling, exactly, but I'm lending a hand with building a power station at the moment.

Think of me the next time you turn a light on and pay rates for that electricity that were determined by a free market under the watchful eye of gubmint regulation.

Bassmatt

25th February 2012, 08:48

Think of me the next time you turn a light on and pay rates for that electricity that were determined by a free market under the watchful eye of gubmint regulation.

ahh...what?

jrandom

25th February 2012, 08:50

ahh...what?

Heh. I wondered who'd bite on that. It's not perfect, is it, but at least the topic gets discussed, and the power retail companies have to toe various lines and are watched for anti-competitive practices.

Imagine trying to enforce such standards on the legal services industry.

flyingcrocodile46

25th February 2012, 10:08

More than 90% of legal disputes involving Lawyers are settled in mediation or joint settlement confrences

The only thing that lawyers and the system add to any dispute is cost. Want turn a $10,000 loss/cost or rip off into a $100,000 rip off? Get lawyers involved. If you are lucky enough to win, you might even get the $10,000 back but it will cost you twice or three times that much to do so and all the other saps on the other side will have spent the same.
In a nutshell.... A $10,000 problem is resolved by spending $20,000 + $20,000, + $20,000, + $20,000 + $20,000 to achieve a $5,000 solution. That’s what Lawyers do.

From my observations of Lawyers in action in disputes where guilt or innocence revolves around interpretation of specialist technical issues, the facts (real guilt or innocence) mean less to them than the perception of risk. Their perception of risk which (has little if any basis in fact) hinges on their limited understanding of the subject and their (real expertise) ability to leverage the little bit they do partially understand to scare risk perception into the other parties similarly ill informed lawyers so they can scare them into offering bigger contributions to the settlement. Kinda like blind poker players bluffing each other by posturing in a game which no one can stand or fold from.

Far better outcomes are achieved using a mediator (who is technically knowledgeable on the matters in dispute) without any lawyers involved. Though this generally only happens if the parties all agree to it, which invariably they won’t.

george formby

25th February 2012, 10:42

Hmmmm, law, a bastion of the self important on occasion. Sometimes a necessary evil, sometimes just evil. A bloke walked into my girlfriends shop a couple of days ago to return a swipe entry card for the local gym. He had had it for a month so a new one had to be purchased & loaded. The delay incurs a charge for a new card. The conditions provided when you get a card state that they must be returned immediately....... Well... this, er, gentleman refused to pay & stated that " immediately " is open to interpretation. The GF would not budge, a call to the gym owner showed she refused to budge, on asked "are you a lawyer" he replied "are calling me a liar?" the question was repeated & lo, "yes I am, you will be hearing from my office!!".

Obviously not a smart lawyer, he should have just chucked the card away & forgot about it.

My experience of lawyers has left me feeling that they regard the law purely with their own financial motivation at the fore front. Why give a straight answer & deal with something efficiently when you can drag it out for months & reap greater rewards?

flyingcrocodile46

25th February 2012, 10:58

Yes! they use their knowledge to advantage in questionable ways.

My Step MIL is a Judge. Prior to her becoming a judge she was a partner in a well known law firm. She asked me to write letters giving my professional opinion (building related) on three occasions so that she could use them in disputes she had with trades people working on her house (so she didn't have to pay them).

The first time I thought the situation she was asking me to provide opinion on was questionable but I accepted her explanation and provided her a useful but measured opinion.

The second time I questioned her explanation of events etc and provided a more measured and less useful opinion.

The third time I questioned her explanation and advised her that IMO the contractor didn't do anything wrong and that I wouldn't be able to help her. I did it as nicely as I could and pointed out that her expectations exceeded the norm quite considerably and that the contractor wasn't to know that his itemised and well detailed scope of works didn't meet her expectations as she had failed to point this out at the appropriate time. (before accepting the quote and having him finish the work 100%)

That was prior to her becoming a judge and saw the end of our association with her and the FIL (their choice not ours).

onearmedbandit

25th February 2012, 11:04

Loving this thread, us car salesmen are breathing a sigh of relief.

Usarka

25th February 2012, 11:14

Loving this thread, us car salesmen are breathing a sigh of relief.

You guys have been relatively fine since you found less detectable ways of winding back odometers. :whistle:

onearmedbandit

25th February 2012, 11:19

You guys have been relatively fine since you found less detectable ways of winding back odometers. :whistle:

I probably shouldn't mention that the lawyers suggested to us how to do that over our yearly 'Fucking over the Public' drinks then.

flyingcrocodile46

25th February 2012, 11:25

I probably shouldn't mention that the lawyers suggested to us how to do that over our yearly 'Fucking over the Public' drinks then.

Of course. If you don't rip off your customers you won't need your lawyer. That doesn't work out very well for them.

onearmedbandit

25th February 2012, 11:31

Of course. If you don't rip off your customers you won't need your lawyer. That doesn't work out very well for them.

Funny but our industry is very well covered by law that we can't lie, deceive or mis-lead. But the public on the other hand. If we sell a car that has an issue we have to rectify it. If a car that a member of the public trades has an issue that's our responsibility. I sold a vehicle recently the other day, went perfectly fine for us, as with all our vehicles it was serviced and independently inspected. 3 weeks later a starter relay fails and the customer demands their money back. We fix the vehicle (simple job), they call in the lawyers. Sold another vehicle that a customer demanded we take back due to excessive fuel consumption. We demand they do a fuel consumption test, which comes back within factory claims. In both instances it was simply a matter of buyers remorse, but we are expected to wear it all.

Usarka

25th February 2012, 16:50

jrandom

25th February 2012, 16:55

Has JRandom told us why he needed the laywer?

I didn't. The rant was about a quarter million dollars of ratepayer money being wasted.

Winston001

25th February 2012, 21:48

An electrician with three years of training and ten years of industry experience will cost you $80 an hour.

Say wut?? You gotta be kidding. :shit: $80/hr to join two wires together? Its only electricity for pitys sake, Fourth Form physics. My brother in law does house wiring all the time and he's an ex-farmer. $25/hr would be generous.

jrandom

25th February 2012, 21:56

Say wut?? You gotta be kidding. :shit: $80/hr to join two wires together? Its only electricity for pitys sake, Fourth Form physics. My brother in law does house wiring all the time and he's an ex-farmer. $25/hr would be generous.

We do some kinda complicated things with electricity these days man! The guys I'm thinking of aren't charging that for house wiring. They're hooking up 220kV lines that can kill them if they do something wrong within 10m of it, or they're reverse-engineering logic circuits in control systems.

I intentionally talked about that top end of the market because I didn't want the cost comparison to be too ludicrous, and I needed an example of the sort of profession that requires a similar amount of tertiary training and gets billed out by the hour.

Usarka

25th February 2012, 22:19

$350/hr, billable by 10min intervals.....

Lawyer that is, not me.

Madness

25th February 2012, 22:20

$25/hr would be generous.

In Auckland the checkout girls at Countdown (shop smarter, New Zealand) are earning more than that. They have to just to pay the crazy rents! :facepalm:

Usarka

25th February 2012, 22:24

In Auckland the checkout girls at Countdown (shop smarter, New Zealand) are earning more than that. They have to just to pay the crazy rents! :facepalm:

Yeah I have to pay them $300 for a hand job....

jrandom

25th February 2012, 22:27

$350/hr, billable by 10min intervals.....

That's sloppy. I'm used to them billing by 6 minute intervals.

Madness

25th February 2012, 22:33

Yeah I have to pay them $300 for a hand job....

Quality don't come cheap... Look at those hands.
http://www.progressive.co.nz/media/1172425/img_4013_new_400x267.jpg

Oblivion

25th February 2012, 22:43

What about accountants? I've heard of a few that charge 600$ an hour for what they do.

onearmedbandit

25th February 2012, 23:28

What about accountants? I've heard of a few that charge 600$ an hour for what they do.

That's because the savings they offer their clients far outweigh the costs.

TrentNz

25th February 2012, 23:52

Hmmm maybe i should become a lawyer :eek5:

nah fuck that too much studying

arkeo

26th February 2012, 09:59

Has JRandom told us why he needed the laywer? :sherlock: What is it this time lol.

Joke:

What's the difference between a flounder and a lawyer?

A: One is a scum sucking bottom feeder. The other is a fish!

Some lawyers happen to be bad people everywhere. There are many similar jokes in Italy, most of them probably translated from English. Maybe old but always amusing: you are in a room with a lawyer, a raper and a ruthless serial killer. You also have a gun and only two bullets. What would you do? Answer: shoot both at the lawyer to be sure to have killed him.

flyingcrocodile46

26th February 2012, 11:02

While walking through a courthouse, a kid enters an empty courtroom. He sees a fine leather briefcase (the kind the lawyers carry) sitting on the table, picks it up and exits through the back door of the courtroom into the judge's chambers. And who should be sitting there; the judge.

Judge: Hey kid, are you familiar with the liquor store across the street from the courthouse?

Kid: (nods).

Judge: Good, I want you to go across the street and steal me a bottle of booze.

The kid runs across the street, enters the liquor store, and when the proprietor is not looking, slips a fifth into the briefcase and brings it back to the judge. The judge immediately opens the bottle and swigs half of it.

Judge: Hey kid, I need you to run another errand. There's a contractor, Slapdash Construction, next to the liquor store. Go to them and tell them that the judge sent you. They'll give you a brown paper bag. Bring it back to me.

The kid runs to Slapdash Construction, tells them that the judge sent him, receives a brown paper bag filled with fifties and hundreds, puts it into the briefcase and takes it to the judge.

Judge: Kid, you did great. Now unzip my fly.

The kid unzips the judge's fly.

Judge: Now take it out and---

Kid: Hey wait a minute mister. I'm not a real attorney; I just found this briefcase in the courtroom!!!

How Judges deal with corruption

Taking his seat in his chambers, the judge faced the opposing lawyers. "So," he said, "I have been presented, by both of you, with a bribe."

Both lawyers squirmed uncomfortably. "You, attorney Leon, gave me $15,000. And you, attorney Campos, gave me $10,000."

The judge reached into his pocket and pulled out a check. He handed it to Leon. "Now then, I'm returning $5,000, and we're going to decide this case solely on its merits!"

These are from a book called Disorder in the American Courts, and are things people actually said in court, word for word, taken down and now published by court reporters who had the torment of staying calm while these exchanges were actually taking place.

ATTORNEY: Are you sexually active?
WITNESS: No, I just lie there.
________________________________
ATTORNEY: What is your date of birth?
WITNESS: July 18th.
ATTORNEY: What year?
WITNESS: Every year.
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: This myasthenia gravis, does it affect your memory at all?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And in what ways does it affect your memory?
WITNESS: I forget.
ATTORNEY: You forget? Can you give us an example of something you forgot?
_____________________________________

ATTORNEY: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?
WITNESS: Did you actually pass the bar exam?
____________________________________
ATTORNEY: The youngest son, the twenty-year-old, how old is he?
WITNESS: Uh, he's twenty-one.
________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Were you present when your picture was taken?
WITNESS: Would you repeat the question?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: So the date of conception (of the baby) was August 8th?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: And what were you doing at that time?
WITNESS: Uh....
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: She had three children, right?
WITNESS: Yes.
ATTORNEY: How many were boys?
WITNESS: None.
ATTORNEY: Were there any girls?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: How was your first marriage terminated?
WITNESS: By death.
ATTORNEY: And by whose death was it terminated?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Can you describe the individual?
WITNESS: He was about medium height and had a beard.
ATTORNEY: Was this a male or a female?
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Doctor, how many of your autopsies have you performed on dead people?
WITNESS: All my autopsies are performed on dead people.
______________________________________
ATTORNEY: Do you recall the time that you examined the body?
WITNESS: The autopsy started around 8:30 p.m.
ATTORNEY: And Mr. Denton was dead at the time?
WITNESS: No, he was sitting on the table wondering why I was doing an autopsy on him!
____________________________________________
ATTORNEY: Are you qualified to give a urine sample?
WITNESS: Huh?
____________________________________________

And the best for last

ATTORNEY: Doctor, before you performed the autopsy, did you check for a pulse?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for blood pressure?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: Did you check for breathing?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: So, then it is possible that the patient was alive when you began the autopsy?
WITNESS: No.
ATTORNEY: How can you be so sure, Doctor?
WITNESS: Because his brain was sitting on my desk in a jar.
ATTORNEY: But could the patient have still been alive, nevertheless?
WITNESS: Yes, it is possible that he could have been alive and practicing law.

A lawyer named Strange died,
and his friend asked the tombstone maker to inscribe on his tombstone, "Here lies Strange, an honest man, and a lawyer." The inscriber insisted that such an inscription would be confusing, for passersby would tend to think that three men were buried under the stone. However he suggested an alternative: He would inscribe, "Here lies a man who was both honest and a lawyer. "That way, whenever anyone walked by the tombstone and read it, they would be certain to remark: "That's Strange!"

Katman

26th February 2012, 16:55

I disagree with you. And get fucked. What sterling service for the community do you perform that you can cast aspersions willy nilly?

I'm a motorcycle mechanic - just think how poorly I rate here.

onearmedbandit

26th February 2012, 19:26

I'm a motorcycle mechanic - just think how poorly I rate here.

Don't worry. KB has a 'Don't ask Don't tell' policy.