Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Wednesday June 28 2017, @11:43PM   Printer-friendly
from the are-you-a-net-gain-or-a-net-drain? dept.

Many jobs have spillover effects on the rest of society. For instance, the value of new treatments discovered by biomedical researchers is far greater than what they or their employers get paid, so they have positive spillovers. Other jobs have negative spillovers, such as those that generate pollution.

A forthcoming paper, by economists at UPenn and Yale,1 reports a survey of the economic literature on these spillover benefits for the 11 highest-earning professions.

There's very little literature, so all these estimates are very, very uncertain, and should be not be taken literally. But it's interesting reading.

Here are the bottom lines – see more detail on the estimates below. (Note that we already discussed an older version of this paper, but the estimates have been updated since then.)

(Emphasis in original retained.)

At the top, researchers who generate +$950,440 in positive externalities; at the bottom, financiers who generate -$104,000 in negative externalities. In a glaring omission, telephone sanitisers were not listed.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by jelizondo on Thursday June 29 2017, @02:57AM (3 children)

    by jelizondo (653) Subscriber Badge on Thursday June 29 2017, @02:57AM (#532780) Journal

    Even third-world countries are moving away from the inquisitorial system: Mexico, with the help of the U.S. Government [usembassy.gov], moved to a modern, oral system.

    Again, not perfect but the best we tried.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:38AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:38AM (#532795)

    I guess your example of Mexico switching is at least better than Pontius and Solomon, but the logic of "Even third-world countries are [jumping off bridges/smoking Marlboro Reds]" isn't incredibly compelling.

    You made the claim that our system is the best, but haven't really provided evidence for that claim. I'm sure that you'll acknowledge the problems associated with cost and plea bargains, but do the "pay to play/win" parts balanced out relative to other modern approaches?

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:59AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @03:59AM (#532801)

    It's rather more complicated than that. The US system is being split into different legal systems and some of them are very different. Drug court and family court around here are very different from what you'd see in civil court or criminal court. Mental health problems are also handled by a different model from what people associate with the US system.

    The problem with the US system is that money has a huge influence. If you've got enough, you can hire the best attorneys, consultants and even have focus groups. Whereas the poor receive attorneys making minimum wage, who may not even be conscious or free of Alzheimer's.

    The inquisitorial system and some of the other systems out there have a different set of problems associated with them. In the US, if you really want the judge to be involved all you have to do is request a bench trial.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @01:12PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 29 2017, @01:12PM (#532936)

      I can’t imagine a different system

      I provided an example of a couterpoint that wasn't a strawman from 2000 years ago and I understand that legal systems are complicated and have different advantages/disadvantages.

      The inquisitorial system and some of the other systems out there have a different set of problems associated with them

      Are you making the claim, "better the devil you know than the devil you don't know" (appeal to ignorance), because that is also not a compelling argument why the US has the best system. Juxtaposing the US system to that of France and showing the US system is better would provide one piece of evidence.

      You seem to speak with authority on the topic, but when you make such a poor argument for your claim and deliberately ignore alternatives then it seems like you are assuming your claim is true and simply rationalizing.