Capitalism Means Policing Big Companies

[Eternity]

@Elliot

I think having the lawyers say it, rather than the CEO, workers or marketers, makes it seem more separate from the rest of the company. But it shouldn’t. Lawyers are especially official representatives of the company: they are highly paid, highly skilled, and have way more authority than most workers.

I got recommended this YouTube short from a layer while at work after this conversation:

Allstate's Poker Tell

Companies hires lawyers that are like them.

The more I think about it the more it does make sense. In general, lawyers should/would act how their clients want them too or you would hire a lawyer that is going to act like how you want them too.

I think my particular bias on this topic has to do with government action against private entities. Whether be companies or individuals. You say:

@Elliot

Court is where you’re supposed to tell the truth and people are often under oath or have to sign any documents they submit to the court and attest the stuff is true and good faith and things of that nature. So I think saying it in court is worse than saying it at e.g. a party – it makes it more serious, more thought out and meant as stated not a careless offhand remark.

From all the legal stuff I think this is probably true for issues related with private companies. I forgot about issues in that area of law, but I do remember, and agreeing, that area of law being fairly good, in my judgement at least, at truth seeking. Its just recently (no rough time frame) I’ve been consuming a lot of legal content related to bad stuff the government does which has made me kind of not trust the legal system. Thinking back on it, I initially read that Lindt lawsuit as “Lindt vs Government” and not “Lindt vs private parties”.

Where I would disagree with your comment from above is with issues related to government action. Now, to be clear, I’ve only really read one side of the arguments on this kind of stuff and all, so there could 100% be stuff I’m aware of. However, here’s a simple example of my point: plea bargain. From what I know people will admit to crimes they may have not committed to get a good plea. A guaranteed one year in prison versus a potential 5-10 years in prison while going through an awful trial process. People take the one year in prison. I don’t think I trust any statement gained through this method. Another example related to pleas: governments will give underlings(? is that the best word here) of an organization reduced (sometimes insanely reduced) sentences to get testimony to throw leadership in jail. Those statements I don’t trust. Its stuff like that that has colored my vision of the court.

@Elliot

From their point of view, their job is to help the clients’ interests. That includes getting off in court but also includes other interests like not harming the company’s reputation.

I agree.