The problem with a socialized healthcare system is that you will eventually run into prisoners dilemmas. You will get free riders, those who will use the system but will not provide for the good of the system (i.e paying taxes). With free riders the consumption of goods will go up unproportionally to the taxes collected, thus requiring a higher tax rate to cover those who free ride. The most obvious solution would be some sort of enforcement for the tax collection (IRS), however you will have to put more energy and resources into the government to pay for that extra service.
You will also get what is known as the Tragedy of the Commons. Here is a short definition from the article in which a parable is used to tell what occurs.
The paradigm example is the use by individuals of communally owned land for the grazing of animals owned privately by those individuals. As Hardin sees it, the utility to each individual of adding a single animal to his own herd is, more or less, the value of that animal; the cost to the individual is the consumption of the resources of that animal divided by the number of communal owners of the common. That is, the benefit to an individual of "hogging" a resource inevitably outweighs the cost where communal resources are concerned. All economically rational herdsman in the community will add as many animals as they can to their own herds and as quickly as they can (before other herdsmen do), meaning that the finite resources of the communal land will quickly become exhausted.
People will not be as concerned with the consumption of resources if they do not feel that they have a value. The solution is to privatize the resource.
Jason: In some cases they are the same. Further, most people arrested on murder charges cannot afford the best that money can buy. They might be able to afford someone private to do some things, but it's unlikely, except for O.J., that many people can afford to pay a private atty yo utilize the resources commonly available to P.D.'s
Jason: In some cases they are the same. Further, most people arrested on murder charges cannot afford the best that money can buy. They might be able to afford someone private to do some things, but it's unlikely, except for O.J., that many people can afford to pay a private atty yo utilize the resources commonly available to P.D.'s
Well then, there appears to be a big market for cheap attorneys. Someone could make alot of money from that many clients...
"Cheap" being open to interpretation. For a crime like murder, depending on the facts, $50K could be cheap and would probably not include resources like investigators and experts that PDs can easily access.
"Cheap" being open to interpretation. For a crime like murder, depending on the facts, $50K could be cheap and would probably not include resources like investigators and experts that PDs can easily access.
Again, I'm just stating that the market is there, it is up the someone else to decide to try to capitalize on it. Personally, I don't think that Public Defense is really an issue about socialization or not seeing as how you a guaranteed one through the fifth amendment. If you don't want the PD then you have the choice to get your own no matter how much it costs, which is how it works now.Correction:If you can't afford an attorney, they you are guaranteed one at the governments expense. If they can, but don't want to spend that much then there would be a market for "cheaper" defense.
Personally, I don't think that Public Defense is really an issue about socialization or not seeing as how you a guaranteed one through the fifth amendment. If you don't want the PD then you have the choice to get your own no matter how much it costs, which is how it works now.
The amendment gives a person the right to have an attorney. It dosn't say someone will be provided. Up until 1963, the practice was usually that a judge would appoint someone. Or not. If you didn't have someone appointed for you and you couldn't afford someone, that didn't infringe upon your right. You still had the right to go out and get whoever you wanted. If your economic reality did not support the exercise of your right, then too bad. Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963) changed that when the Supreme Court said that attorneys should be provided. So the P.D. was born and could be thought of as a socialization. Whereas before it was YOUR responsibility, now the Government provided for you.
What is the motivation for becoming a Public Defender? I can't imagine they get paid nearly what private trial lawyers do. Out of the goodness of their hearts? Any of the lawyers here ever consider it?
What is the motivation for becoming a Public Defender? I can't imagine they get paid nearly what private trial lawyers do. Out of the goodness of their hearts? Any of the lawyers here ever consider it?
Here regular lawyers can be assigned to work public defender cases. So if you are lucky you can have a QC (although they aren't called that anymore, the really good expensive lawyers) defending you for your drugs bust. I think those guys have sneaky ways to get out of it. I really have very little idea how it works so I could be talking out my butt.
What is the motivation for becoming a Public Defender? I can't imagine they get paid nearly what private trial lawyers do. Out of the goodness of their hearts? Any of the lawyers here ever consider it?
Motiavtion? To eat. Seriously. The competition for decent jobs can be fierce, and some money is better than no money. Then, you start to see how fun it is. That hooks you in for a couple of more years. Then you try again for a better job or maybe go out on your own.
I was a P.D. in a small (population of about 75,000) KY town for three years. Pay wasn't great but not too bad. Court could be VERY fun. Client contact not so much.
Then you try again for a better job or maybe go out on your own.
Thank you for proving my point.
Whaaaaa? The last thing you said was:
You're arrested on murder charges. Do you want the PD or the best that money can buy?
How does someone trying to get a better paying job have any connection to whether a defendant gets good representation from the P.D.? I might try to get a better paying job (or just a job where I don't have to deal with such bastard clients) in three years, but there is probably someone who's just been hired by the office today that's ten times better than me on my best day. Also, there do exist those career types who have a particular devotion to the office and stay forever.
The better lawyers get the better jobs, while the not-so-great lawyers remain PDs. Private industry wins again.
Whaaa? As I said, there are plenty of people who stay in the office out of a sense of duty. Or out of just being able to handle the clients, who are all bastards. When I left, it was partly for money, but mostly because I was SO tired of the clients. Many people who stayed were much better lawyers than me.
Depends on the facts and how much money I have. Also, I have friends in the P.D.'s office that I would trust to do a good job. I also have friends in private practice that I wouldn't trust.
Which is one of the reasons you might ask for a referral. . .
Just to be clear: It's a gross oversimplification to say that, just because someone is a P.D., they're not a "good lawyer". I personally know some genius P.D.s that care about their clients and do great in court. I also personally know some private guys who have absolutely zero interest in you once they get your money.
I also know the opposites of the above.
What about doctors? Would you think that, just because someone is an Army Doc (or a VA doc, or an ER doc), (s)he's not as good as someone else?
I think the problem is that the argument assumes that everyone is primarily motivated by money. That may be true in general, but it is not true for every specific attorney. Some fantastic attorneys are willing to forgo the extra money they could make in private practice because they love the job. Most Public Defenders spend a whole lot more time in court than attorneys in private practice - even private criminal attorneys. If you like being in court, there is no better job.
I actually use military medical services mostly because I am still covered under my dad's Tricare(military) healthcare plan until I turn 21 (only two more years ). They are more than qualified. However, unless I join the military, once I turn 21, I have no choice but to go private. I am perfectly fine with this and am willing to pay for ones health services. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying that PD's are any less qualified than private lawyers, I just don't want to have to pay the legal fee's of some drug dealer in LA through my taxes.
WIP: I don't know about CA, but in KY most P.D. defendants are required to pay a portion of their P.D.'s fees. A person is supposed to only be able to get out of it entirely by showing compelling proof they have no money, no property, no job, NOTHING. I did have personal experience of a defendant that listed a nice house and a new model Lexus on their Affidavit of Indigency and still had the P.D. appointed for him.
And your statement that the military docs are more than qualified makes my point. There exists, whether it's true or not, a stereotype that military and especially VA docs are not as good as private docs. You have personal experience that's not true just as I have personal experience that the "bad P.D." stereotype isn't true.
Even paying for a portion of their legal fees through my taxes is too much.
I did have personal experience of a defendant that listed a nice house and a new model Lexus on their Affidavit of Indigency and still had the P.D. appointed for him.
Just a matter of whose ox is being gored. That guy is probably complaining on another forum that he shouldn't have to pay taxes to support your med care through military med services.
Just a matter of whose ox is being gored. That guy is probably complaining on another forum that he shouldn't have to pay taxes to support your med care through military med services.
While this may be true, my father earned his health care through service in the military. Naturally it would apply to his children too, which it does, until an age at which the government thinks I can support myself. After I turn 21, there is no way for me to get military health services unless I join the military.
Comments
You will also get what is known as the Tragedy of the Commons. Here is a short definition from the article in which a parable is used to tell what occurs. People will not be as concerned with the consumption of resources if they do not feel that they have a value. The solution is to privatize the resource.
I was a P.D. in a small (population of about 75,000) KY town for three years. Pay wasn't great but not too bad. Court could be VERY fun. Client contact not so much.
Oh yeah - private industry sux.
Just to be clear: It's a gross oversimplification to say that, just because someone is a P.D., they're not a "good lawyer". I personally know some genius P.D.s that care about their clients and do great in court. I also personally know some private guys who have absolutely zero interest in you once they get your money.
I also know the opposites of the above.
What about doctors? Would you think that, just because someone is an Army Doc (or a VA doc, or an ER doc), (s)he's not as good as someone else?
And your statement that the military docs are more than qualified makes my point. There exists, whether it's true or not, a stereotype that military and especially VA docs are not as good as private docs. You have personal experience that's not true just as I have personal experience that the "bad P.D." stereotype isn't true.
This is a great example of why I shouldn't.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/07/health.care/
Live Stream: http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN.aspx