andrel wrote:
> Ok, this lacks some some subtleties, and yes, IANAL.

No doubt there are careers that take more study than lawyering does and 
which are of a bigger general benefit to people, yes.  I just wouldn't say 
they're "without knowledge or skills". Indeed, in the US, I'm not sure you 
can graduate from undergraduate college and actually be a lawyer without 
additional study. Maybe you can, but I don't know anyone who didn't go back 
to school for it.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   I ordered stamps from Zazzle that read "Place Stamp Here".

Post a reply to this message

On 26-9-2009 21:04, Darren New wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> Ok, this lacks some some subtleties, and yes, IANAL.
> 
> No doubt there are careers that take more study than lawyering does and 
> which are of a bigger general benefit to people, yes. 

And earn significantly less money, which was sort of the point.

> I just wouldn't 
> say they're "without knowledge or skills". Indeed, in the US, I'm not 
> sure you can graduate from undergraduate college and actually be a 
> lawyer without additional study. Maybe you can, but I don't know anyone 
> who didn't go back to school for it.

I know what you mean. I am just simply a bit annoyed that there are so 
much jobs that earn more than a real craftsman. In general I lament the 
loss of skills that is going on here right now. Which makes me sad. At 
the same time having to witness some very skilled craftsmen that really 
know their materials to get laid off or pestered into a desk job makes 
me angry. Add to that that the persons that did it made more money, 
didn't know anything about what these craftsmen were doing and simply 
decided that anything they made could be bought on the internet. Then 
you know why I will make some unflattering remarks about some people for 
the coming years.

Post a reply to this message

On 09/26/09 13:46, andrel wrote:
> the 80s, women often did it to find a husband). There may be a 'brutal'
> test at the end, but in physics we studied a lot more and still the
> percentage that graduates is way lower than in law.

	The reason there are more lawyers than physicists is that society needs 
more lawyers than they do physicists.

> Somebody once said: 'why would I study hard to be a physicist for 5
> years, while I can also do law and be the manager of a group of
> physicist, earn more, and have 4 years of partying at uni instead?'
> In the US you might add to that: why would I study hard to be a doctor,
> while I can also do law and sue them?

	Lawyers managing physicists? How'd that happen. What kind of job do the 
physicists have?

	BTW, over here law school is graduate school, and you need to have some 
degree prior to entering law school. It's fairly competitive (although I 
won't try to equate it to physics in any way). And while they perhaps do 
party (don't really know), law school is fairly demanding here.

-- 
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright 
until you hear them speak.

Post a reply to this message

Fredrik Eriksson wrote:
> http://fe79.myftp.org/misc/google_se.png
> 
> Too bad our kids are so stupid...

I have to wonder just what, exactly, those results mean.

Are there really 35,000,000 web sites that ask the question, "Why are 
Swedish people so good looking?"

Or is it that there are 35,000,000 web sites use each of those words 
somewhere on their page?

Or is it inflated to boost someone's ego?

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

andrel wrote:
>  From my personal experience I know that also the writing skills are far 
> below what was thought in my days.

I actually saw an article recently about how writing skills are better 
today than they were 20 years ago.  Specifically, the ability of a 
writer to adapt their work for their target audience.

Unfortunately, I can't remember where I read it, and google is giving me 
too many unrelated links.

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Somewhere somebody probably has all sorts of interesting statistics. 
> Damned if I know how to find them though...

http://www.google.co.uk/intl/en/landing/internetstats/

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message

news:4abee0c2$1@news.povray.org...
>I actually saw an article recently about how writing skills are better 
>today than they were 20 years ago.  Specifically, the ability of a writer 
>to adapt their work for their target audience.
> Unfortunately, I can't remember where I read it, and google is giving me 
> too many unrelated links.

It's about the Standford Study of Writing
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-09/st_thompson
http://ssw.stanford.edu/
The obvious criticism of the study is that it's based on the writings of 
Standford students, who are not the most illiterate bunch. The writing 
skills of Standford students may be better, but what does it say on the 
writing skills of the rest of the population? What rings true, however, is 
that people write more, and that just having more venues to write (even if 
it's just inane Youtube/4chan/fark comments) is better than not writing at 
all.

G.

Post a reply to this message

Gilles Tran wrote:
> It's about the Standford Study of Writing
> http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-09/st_thompson
> http://ssw.stanford.edu/
> The obvious criticism of the study is that it's based on the writings of 
> Standford students, who are not the most illiterate bunch. The writing 
> skills of Standford students may be better, but what does it say on the 
> writing skills of the rest of the population? What rings true, however, 
> is that people write more, and that just having more venues to write 
> (even if it's just inane Youtube/4chan/fark comments) is better than not 
> writing at all.

Thanks, that's exactly the one I was thinking of :)

...Chambers

Post a reply to this message