Hang on, we agree that the time spent on complete meaninglessness is a big problem. You say that the way to reduce that is clearer laws.
-
-
I say the way to reduce that is clearer authority, less divided power. I'm not seeing how clearer laws would help time spent on meaningless
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
aspects since all of the arguing over meaningless stuff comes directly from the law, which tends to be rather clear about the necessity of
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
arguing about the meaningless stuff.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
divided power sucks, but isnt relevant here. if your authority decides cases inconsistently, economic activity will be discouraged.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
if your authority is consistent, investors still need to know how he will eventually come down in the event of a dispute
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
if one party is clearly in breach, the contract likely provides a remedy, and any court involvement will be simple enforcement
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
however when there is an ambiguity in the contract, or something happens which the contract did not provide for, lawyers emerge
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cultofunreason @jkomrade
The legal system fails at quickly and efficiently dealing with the ambiguity. These disputes that should be solved by sitting down for a
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
day with the right authority are instead dragged out into brief after brief after brief.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Furthermore, lawyers argue that clear things are ambiguous when in any sensible system they would not be able to get away with it.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.