Meowy Wowy Puddin' and Pie

Kitty eats a Word Salad

Possessed by British Poltergeist

leave a comment »

dunno what came over me with this one.  not my usual style.  written in response to Yet Another horrible 5-4 SCOUTUS decision, this one, which i guess has a pretty british flavour to it, ruling on the legality of coercive unilateral contracts that allow the offerer (the employer, in this case, although the ruling is more broad than that) to remove the right of offeree (employee, in this case) to a civil trial in case of disputes, instead forcing them to accept private arbitration, which are notorious in their bias to their hiring parties. (e.g. see credit card disputes).  thread is here, original blog is here.

Now that all civil disagreements are to be decided by the free market, I just can’t help but think of the possibilities! Justice has never been so free, and the consumer-employee will see all the benefit.

Justice in a free market will be an efficient Justice. It is well known that the market will not tolerate internal discrepancies, and therefore the value of a thing put into it shall quickly stabilize at a equilibrium condition. So too will it be with arbitration. Let me give an example of just one aspect of the arbitration situation that the market can fix – the expensive cost of the arbitrators themselves. Do high-priced New York City lawyers got you down with their high-rise Manhattan fees? “Y’all want 15% of the settlement ?? Give me a break!” Well, the market has shown that cheaper alternatives are available – Catholic priests, for instance, who can subsist on God’s Love alone. (i.e. a tithe of just 10%, a considerable savings). Its also entirely feasible that Priests in foreign dioceses, where labour laws limiting hours to 40 a week do not exist, may be able to decide on multiple cases for the same price, effectively lowering the arbitration fee to five or even three percent. Yet another savings passed on to the consumer.

In fact, thinking about it a little more, some progressive parties may not even require that traditional stodginess of a gray-haired father meddling in their business. Why let the fallibility of man pollute Justice when, reasonably, the market *itself* could decide our fates instead? Imagine a world where investors can buy “stock” in either side of a case – that is to say, you can either buy stock in the defendant, or you can buy stock in the company – thus fueling a particular side with capital power. Then, its as simple as one dollar gives one vote! The victorious party pays out dividends to their investors and then everyone can go on with their merry way, satisfied that the matter has concluded in the most fair and democratic way possible. Yes, I think that putting our lives in stocks will truly be the Justice of the Future…

May GOd bless us, everyone.


Written by meowywowy

June 25, 2010 at 6:41 pm

Posted in ethics

Tagged with , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: