Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Freak

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 490
41
News Discussion / Re: It is called law school, not lawyer school
« on: August 20, 2008, 02:54:00 PM »
Hey if they want to call it a Doctorate, I'm all for it... ;)

Still Harvard (who first began awarding JDs) calls it a Juris Doctor.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/about/

42
Essentially, it seems like you have a real inability for practicing empathy. Essentially, you are saying that because the parents of these children were irresponsible they don't deserve help to succeed (Am I wrong?).You say that 100 years does not compute and that you are not your great-great grandfather. These children are not necessarily their parents either and should they be held accountable for their parents mistake and should they suffer? Those kids didn't ask to be born into that situation; they just were and it sucks for them.

Sorry for late reply ... busy trying to recover for people who really were hurt by somebody.

Empathy? When was the last time you donated to somebody you felt deserved help? I donated thousands when I earned less than $25k/yr. I do not waste money - even on a TV, yep no TV and my car's worth less than $3k. I have donated many thousands of dollars to those with whom I feel empathy towards.

You ask if children should suffer for their parents mistakes, no, but they do and always will. You correctly point out that kids have no choice in birth location. Still, what about those in Sudan, N. Korea, or China...? Well the vast, vast, vast, majority of those children live far, far, far worse lives than any child in the USA. Those children deserve my empathy far more than anybody in the USA.

And last I checked, empathy is not something you force on another. AA and its ilk are forced on people. How dare anybody assert that we should have empathy and then force a policy or law on somebody else? No, those people could not care less about empathy.

Quote
And COME ON- In what way did you or your parents really suffer? ::) Does helping other succeed really cause you to suffer soooo much. I don't suffer. In fact, I feel like I could sacrifice a lot more to help others.

Well then why don't you sacrifice more?  ::) It's not like anybody forces you to keep your money....

My parents realized that the public system provided a poor education in many ways. So guess what, they home schooled me. My mother basically sacrificed her social life and any hope of a career to teach us children for nearly 20 years. We shopped at 2nd-hand stores & Aldis. Meanwhile, they paid taxes to send other kids to public school. Public school officials harassed us to attend school. Even our neighbors harassed us because they understood that their school lost state money because we didn't attend....ya, it was quite clear that it cost the school less for us to attend that the state paid the school per student.

Quote
What I think should be done:

 I believe all you can really do is take these disadvantaged kids out of those neighborhoods and completely remove the negative environment. That will never happen because it costs too much money and people generally don't give a damn about funding public education.

No, see my parents did that. It just takes two parents and a willingness to sacrifice for your children.

Quote
Back on the PTA meetings:

If those kids parents started going to PTA meetings, I highly doubt that their performance would drastically change. We can both agree that PTA meetings alone are not the answer. We could probably conduct a poll and those parents who attend PTA meetings have a higher household salary and more-than-likely a higher education level as well in the family. Who knows though right?

Agreed, PTA meeting attendance just shows a parents investment in their children. I guess I need not redact my statement.

Quote
AS far as rural employment compared to that of the ghetto, it's because no one lives there.  You can't make blanket statements about all rural areas and tote it around like the saving answer. Rural unemployment is rising and highest in the south. I will grant that employment is rising someplace due to an increase of old folks homes and vacation places. I want to know where you are getting these statistics by the way? I looked for them and couldn't find them. I also thought education level was lowest in rural areas with most citizens only having high school educations. Did you even look at that link I sent you? It's based upon census data and is used by many states legislators to write education-based grants and bills.

I know rural areas vary, but I just used the US Census website - great site. High school graduation, at least, is higher in rural areas.

43
You're essentially arguing that because some people royally blew it and had children when they lacked the time or money to support those children, other children should suffer the same. Other children with responsible parents, should not have to suffer because those with irresponsible parents do - those who lack the money to buy lunch for their children.

Ask your teacher relatives how students whose parents attend PTA meetings perform. That's the only issue I raised from the teachers I know. If they say the opposite, I will redact my statement.

You ask where people should work.......look at the unemployment rate in rural areas and that in the ghetto...


44
     Meggo & dsetterl,

     I would refine your points a little - resources determine education, not just money, but time. I believe parental time plays a more vital role. If parents spend the time to attend PTA meetings, hours nightly helping with homework and attention, their students will succeed barring some mental disorder. I know two teachers well and many others a little. They all tell me that the children whose parent(s) attend PTA meetings do better - much better. Of course not all children whose parents skip do poorly, but you get the point.

    Privates schools seem to do better for two reasons I've seen. First, they operate with less overhead and second they expel rebellious students. I attended one (2 years out of 4 because my folks couldn't afford it each year) which spent about 1/2 per student what the local public high school spent and it produced students with an average ACT score at least 5 points higher. Education is a privilege and should be treated that way by students.

     As for people moving, well good for them, it shows that they have priorities - their children. Of course those communities will do better - and should. In fact I would fault any parent, with the means, who did not remove children from a poor school. Frankly, children have one shot at an education and they do not have the time to wait for school improvement. It's not that expensive. The cost of living is much less in rural areas and the schools are better. I've seen rural 3bdr apartments for under $400/mth.
   

Galt,

     I agree, a huge tort (crime?) occurred, but you named the wrong defendant. The only entity is Government, State or Federal. Unfortunately, they have immunity. I recently wrote a letter to a client explaining that although an ambulance very negligently side-swiped her car as she was pulled over to let it pass, she had no claim because it was an ambulance on official business with immunity. In other words, she had a broken back and no recourse.

     The only other tortfeasors were slaveholders and they're all dead. They owe slaves money for the work they did, but the slaves are all dead too! The law is that only people alive when a tort occurs may collect (so the very next generation could collect against slaveholders' estates). After that, any claim ends. You know why? Because the law likes finality and that's why the Rule against Perpetuities and Statutes of Limitation exist.

     Get this, the US government even negotiated away the rights of POWs forced to serve as slaves in Japan during WWII, for corporations which still exist! Corporations which became wealthy, in part, because of that labor! Further, some of those POWs still live! (last time I checked)

     I'm trying to explain that the tort analogy fails to justify AA. Morally, of course, you still have an argument, but only against people whose ancestors didn't fight for the North in the Civil War, didn't immigrate after Jim Crow laws, and didn't support discrimination. Unless of course, you feel that former US POW slaves in Japan and their ancestors, have a moral right against you.  Unless you feel that you owe the British because you're an American and we stole the 13 colonies from them. After all, they did pay for Manhattan Island and had clear title. (you think our lending practices are bad...)

     Society is made of individuals and blaming them all for the torts/crimes of some ancestors is exactly the same thing as stereotyping blacks.

    Now, you make the point that some blacks need help succeeding. The reasons really do not matter to me. The fact of the matter is that they do. Now, if people do not obtain an education and do not support themselves, it hurts everybody who does. They are more likely to cause problems (you name it - disease, crime, negligence etc.).

    The solution is tricky, very tricky. On the one hand, they clearly need help and self-supporting people can help. On the other hand, the goal is for them to eventually help themselves. Give a man a meal and feed for a day, give him a fishing pole and feed him for a lifetime. Unfortunately, people do not generally like work. The trick is providing tools to those who will work and not motivating them to avoid work. That's why I advocate mandatory training and education (with tests for crying out loud) with any government aid.

     In addition, I would require mandatory budgets...luxuries go bye bye. Just in case you wonder what luxuries are - modern convenience people didn't have 25 years ago - cell phones, laptops, ipods, DVD players, xboxes...mainly entertainment - go play outside, read or learn to read, sell luxuries and do not buy more (how much do painted nails with those special designs cost? I see people at Aldi using food stamps with those nails)... find work and pay taxes so the next child receives a better education.

   

45
How about America gives back the land it took, pays for the labor it was unjustly enriched by, gets rid of legacy admits, criminalizes all intoxicants instead of just the ones minorities use, abolishes the distinction between white collar crime and other crime and then strictly prohibits racial profiling?  What is it about that that really bothers you?

1. Why don't you start with your first house?
2. Those labor thieves are dead. Last I checked I'm not liable for even a murder my father commits.
3. What? Crack vs. Alcohol? Unsure what you mean here.
4. White collar crime is distinguished because it generally doesn't deal with direct physical attacks on people. Sorry mate, there's a huge difference between sticking a gun in my face to take my money and stealing from my bank account. What you ask? The weapon.
5. As for racial profiling, yes I agree it should not happen. It does, if it happens to you and you suffered some tangible damage - lost wages, confinement, etc., then find a lawyer. Actually, I am a lawyer, send me a pm and we'll sue or I'll find you a lawyer who will.
1. First house?
2. Yeah, but you wouldnt be able to keep any of the proceeds of your father's theft or murder.
3. Crack, marijuana v. alcohol and cigarettes
4. Maybe there is a huge difference, but why should someone who embezzles vast amount of money go to a minimum security prison where someone who sells drugs gets mixed in with the rapists and murderers? 
5. It is a fact that african americans are more likely to get pulled over merely because they're black - it's called DWB

1. Yes, return it to Native Americans. It's on their land.
2. Depends - theft has a statute of limitations and 1/2 my ancestors immigrated well after 1870.
3. Last I checked both colors use all four. But frankly, I believe they all should be illegal.
4. Drug dealers often commit violent crime too...embezzlers don't
5. True enough, problem is that to be worth a civil lawsuit, there must be enough damages to pay an attorney fee...now a class action...hmmmm. Of course, there's that darn Tort Immunity the Gov. has for most actions.

46
General Board / Re: unauthorized pratice of law
« on: July 25, 2008, 06:20:56 PM »
Yes, but be very very careful what you do.

47
General Board / Re: 1 year later....still glad u went to law school?
« on: July 25, 2008, 06:20:12 PM »
9 months as an attorney. Yes I'm glad I went.

48
I don't know why 'direct result' and '100 years ago' doesn't compute. In the case of First Nations people, 100 years ago - force them into residential schooling where they are made to speak english only, dress and act in a western manner, and any expressions of their heritage is expressly forbidden. Add on top of that consistent sexual and physical abuse. Today - a group which is still in great poverty, marginalized, with large substance abuse problems, and a youth population many who understandably feel no connection to 'white' society and lack linguistic links to their First Nations history.

I think there are quite a few examples of parents not raising their kids, and their kids go on to be successful and vice versa. The biggest indicator of economic success is level of education, imo.

First - you apparently do not know the difference between the words "direct" and "indirect." I hit you and as a direct result you have a bloody nose. Indirectly, you contracted a deadly disease and died from the blood transfusion you received because of the blood running down your face. In between the face strike and the transfusion, something else could have happened to prevent your death. E.g. you could have gone to a different place for the transfusion.

Who do you think most influences a child's choice to obtain a good education? Parents, good thing too, because they have the responsibility. I know exceptions happen and even a 10% exception rate does equal millions of success stories, so yes, quite a few people do succeed despite parental neglect.

It's still the single largest success factor and thus where communities should focus.

 

49
How about America gives back the land it took, pays for the labor it was unjustly enriched by, gets rid of legacy admits, criminalizes all intoxicants instead of just the ones minorities use, abolishes the distinction between white collar crime and other crime and then strictly prohibits racial profiling?  What is it about that that really bothers you?

1. Why don't you start with your first house?
2. Those labor thieves are dead. Last I checked I'm not liable for even a murder my father commits.
3. What? Crack vs. Alcohol? Unsure what you mean here.
4. White collar crime is distinguished because it generally doesn't deal with direct physical attacks on people. Sorry mate, there's a huge difference between sticking a gun in my face to take my money and stealing from my bank account. What you ask? The weapon.
5. As for racial profiling, yes I agree it should not happen. It does, if it happens to you and you suffered some tangible damage - lost wages, confinement, etc., then find a lawyer. Actually, I am a lawyer, send me a pm and we'll sue or I'll find you a lawyer who will.

50
I really agree with all the posts on this page. AA isn't about discrimination (otherwise quite frankly, the Arab-American population should be heavily admitted) it's about leveling opportunity. Yes, there are whites who come from disadvantaged socio-economic situations. There is absolutely no denying that. But looking at population as a whole (and history), when you have an entire community with lower income, higher rates of violence and incarceration and alcohol/drug abuse, and people who are able to overcome that, then yes, they should be rewarded.  For the groups that have been historically marginalized, the problems of that marginalization STILL exists to this day. Anyone who thinks otherwise is lying to themselves. I'm not just talking about African Americans, but look at the American Indian (and First Nations) communities. The problems that exist within those communities to this day are a direct result of events which took place over a 100 years ago.

Direct result and 100 years ago does not compute, sorry, or was that just hyperbole?

     At this point in history, the only real (indirect) relation to success and history is how your parents raised and provided for you. If they did a bad job (didn't ensure you received an education and nurturing), you have a serious disadvantage and it's up to you to raise your children so they have a better chance.

     Frankly, if your parents neglected you, odds are you won't succeed (financially/professionally) in American life. If you do succeed, then odds are you neglected your children in the process, unless you succeeded before having them, because you had to work so hard to get there.

     Look at a community's single parent family ratio and you'll see a close correlation to its children's' success rate.

     AA etcetera are waste of time, energy and resources, instead, spend it convincing and training families to raise and nurture their children.

     Family on public aid? Well guess what, you get to attend parenting classes which teach you how to budget among other things. Maybe learn to teach children that water is better for them than soda, that they do not need $50 shoes. Maybe parents will learn that they do not need painted nails, a Coach purse or a $5000 car, unless they can also afford health insurance, a mortgage, and time off work to spend with their children.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 490