Crime does pay,a lot of people.
Discussion
Whilst drinking this afternoon/evening which is never a good start to a sensible discussion but hey ho,
One other drunk stated that the world finncially collapse without crime!
His argument was that if all crime ceased then most of the police,courts,justice system and the staff from solicitors,security firms,prisons etc. would be without work.
going so far as affecting the likes of printing companies(lots of forms/paperwork),lock and alarm companies or anything to do with personal or property protection would be un-needed,locksmiths key cutters,insurance companies and all the companies that supply replacement goods would suffer,even the bloke that comes to replace your lock/door or window will be affected and so on.
I argued that he was talking nonsense at the time but in hindsight it seems to make sense.
Or am I missing something?.
It sounds like a lot of people affected on the face of it.
I`m not suggesting we should all be going out stealing Transits and ram-raiding Tesco,or rob the neighbours shed but it does seem that crime creates a lot of legal employment,so it does pay.
One other drunk stated that the world finncially collapse without crime!
His argument was that if all crime ceased then most of the police,courts,justice system and the staff from solicitors,security firms,prisons etc. would be without work.
going so far as affecting the likes of printing companies(lots of forms/paperwork),lock and alarm companies or anything to do with personal or property protection would be un-needed,locksmiths key cutters,insurance companies and all the companies that supply replacement goods would suffer,even the bloke that comes to replace your lock/door or window will be affected and so on.
I argued that he was talking nonsense at the time but in hindsight it seems to make sense.
Or am I missing something?.
It sounds like a lot of people affected on the face of it.
I`m not suggesting we should all be going out stealing Transits and ram-raiding Tesco,or rob the neighbours shed but it does seem that crime creates a lot of legal employment,so it does pay.
Crime is net negative.
Most victims are insured. That's a penalty to all non victims.
For every crime that _may_ happen, lots don't. Security guards on night watch contribute 0 work / value add to the economy.
Your mate is looking at the drop in cost from an income perspective, not a cost perspective. Tell him he's making an interesting point, but misses the wider picture. If he continues to argue, offer to tarmac his drive then s
t in his bin.
Most victims are insured. That's a penalty to all non victims.
For every crime that _may_ happen, lots don't. Security guards on night watch contribute 0 work / value add to the economy.
Your mate is looking at the drop in cost from an income perspective, not a cost perspective. Tell him he's making an interesting point, but misses the wider picture. If he continues to argue, offer to tarmac his drive then s
t in his bin.marshalla said:
Well I'd certainly have to find a new way to earn a crust. 99% of my work comes from law enforcement agencies since the cuts in legal aid started to bite.
The way solicitors charge its a crime in itself. Nonsense letters back and forth and suchlike. So glad the cuts in Legal Aid made you have to "work" to find your work.Cancer also pays a lot of people at them moment, probably much more than crime does in the developed world, 10s of millions spent in research and treatment and prevention, daily
do you believe the world would financially collapse if we came up with a cheap effective cure for cancer?
If you took away any a large chunk significant industry over night you would do enormous damage to the economy of course, as you'd put huge numbers of people out of work, at the same time. That does not mean we are reliant on those industries for anything more than the purpose they serve.
If crime was to reduce to nothing or almost nothing gradually, say over a 10 year period, there would be enormous benefits to the economy.
do you believe the world would financially collapse if we came up with a cheap effective cure for cancer?
If you took away any a large chunk significant industry over night you would do enormous damage to the economy of course, as you'd put huge numbers of people out of work, at the same time. That does not mean we are reliant on those industries for anything more than the purpose they serve.
If crime was to reduce to nothing or almost nothing gradually, say over a 10 year period, there would be enormous benefits to the economy.
I was going to say if you want to read up on the theory behind this, and why your friend is wrong then look up "broken windows theory", but that's something different, what you actually want is [url]'the broken windows fallacy'
If you want to read a real life example of why your friend is quite possibly bang on the money then read this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal
If you want to read a real life example of why your friend is quite possibly bang on the money then read this;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kids_for_cash_scandal
ging84 said:
Cancer also pays a lot of people at them moment, probably much more than crime does in the developed world, 10s of millions spent in research and treatment and prevention, daily
do you believe the world would financially collapse if we came up with a cheap effective cure for cancer?
Many people believe there are cures and or treatments which are more effective than conventional radiotherapy with fewer side effects too.. And that these are constrained for the reasons you set out.do you believe the world would financially collapse if we came up with a cheap effective cure for cancer?
As to crime does pay, well yes, a lot of people are employed in crime detection, prevention and so on. But no society is without crime, human nature is such that there will always be those who are criminals.
In fact, I suspect most of us on here are hardened criminals, exceeding a number on a sign routinely whilst driving....
shoehorn said:
Whilst drinking this afternoon/evening which is never a good start to a sensible discussion but hey ho,
One other drunk stated that the world finncially collapse without crime!
His argument was that if all crime ceased then most of the police,courts,justice system and the staff from solicitors,security firms,prisons etc. would be without work.
going so far as affecting the likes of printing companies(lots of forms/paperwork),lock and alarm companies or anything to do with personal or property protection would be un-needed,locksmiths key cutters,insurance companies and all the companies that supply replacement goods would suffer,even the bloke that comes to replace your lock/door or window will be affected and so on.
I argued that he was talking nonsense at the time but in hindsight it seems to make sense.
Or am I missing something?.
It sounds like a lot of people affected on the face of it.
I`m not suggesting we should all be going out stealing Transits and ram-raiding Tesco,or rob the neighbours shed but it does seem that crime creates a lot of legal employment,so it does pay.
Certainly a great many people who don't commit crime benefit from others doing so, because it keeps them in employment. One of the reasons that most drugs are still illegal is that too many people in power would be worse off if they were legal.One other drunk stated that the world finncially collapse without crime!
His argument was that if all crime ceased then most of the police,courts,justice system and the staff from solicitors,security firms,prisons etc. would be without work.
going so far as affecting the likes of printing companies(lots of forms/paperwork),lock and alarm companies or anything to do with personal or property protection would be un-needed,locksmiths key cutters,insurance companies and all the companies that supply replacement goods would suffer,even the bloke that comes to replace your lock/door or window will be affected and so on.
I argued that he was talking nonsense at the time but in hindsight it seems to make sense.
Or am I missing something?.
It sounds like a lot of people affected on the face of it.
I`m not suggesting we should all be going out stealing Transits and ram-raiding Tesco,or rob the neighbours shed but it does seem that crime creates a lot of legal employment,so it does pay.
There are many other ways in which crime benefits others and government. Terrorists crashing planes into the Twin Towers was a shot in the arm for tax authorities globally, who can now keep a far closer eye on people with the excuse that they are preventing the financial support of terrorism. Some would argue that there is a social benefit due to a greater tax take.
Who Me said:
The way solicitors charge its a crime in itself. Nonsense letters back and forth and suchlike. So glad the cuts in Legal Aid made you have to "work" to find your work.
Might want to have a look at my profile before accusing me of being a solicitor or overcharging.Then you can consider whether those who cannot afford to engage all the expertise they need can still get a fair trial.
Edited by marshalla on Saturday 23 August 09:19
Back on thread, there is a sense in which all economic activity is helpful, and even crime generates income that moves back into the mainstream economy after a while, but I agree that it would be better not to have crime and therefore not to need the apparatus of detection, enforcement and control that surrounds crime. Stating the obvious perhaps, but as well as having negative economic impact crime kills people and makes living people unhappy. It helps to perpetuate violence, unfairness, political corruption, environmental blight, you name it.
I am a civil lawyer, and civil law is a multi billion pound industry, but I'd happily abolish my job if I could see a world in which people don't have civil disputes with one another or with governments. I am not expecting this to happen any time soon.
I am a civil lawyer, and civil law is a multi billion pound industry, but I'd happily abolish my job if I could see a world in which people don't have civil disputes with one another or with governments. I am not expecting this to happen any time soon.
I used to do a lot of business in N Ireland during the troubles and was told constantly that if the troubles ever ended, the economy would collapse. Loads of people made an honest living from the violence, glaziers, security staff, funeral directors, etc, etc.
Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I used to do a lot of business in N Ireland during the troubles and was told constantly that if the troubles ever ended, the economy would collapse. Loads of people made an honest living from the violence, glaziers, security staff, funeral directors, etc, etc.
Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
I'm sure I watched a programme years ago that stated 1p of every taxed pound went straight to N.I.Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
One way in which violence was reduced in Northern Ireland was by massive investment in the economy of the region, as people are often less keen on fighting when they have stuff. The fact that Northern Ireland was skint before exacerbated the violence, and it's notable that recent revivals of violence have coincided with economic difficulty.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I used to do a lot of business in N Ireland during the troubles and was told constantly that if the troubles ever ended, the economy would collapse. Loads of people made an honest living from the violence, glaziers, security staff, funeral directors, etc, etc.
Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
I'm sure I watched a programme years ago that stated 1p of every taxed pound went straight to N.I.Well the troubles did end, and N Ireland is a far better place for it.
SpeckledJim said:
Without crime, everything would be cheaper. So we could all have more of it.
The people employed fighting crime aren't 'helping' the economy, they're hindering it. If they weren't fighting crime, they'd be doing other, more economically productive, work.
This. We are having to pay for something that produces nothing of worth to us or society.The people employed fighting crime aren't 'helping' the economy, they're hindering it. If they weren't fighting crime, they'd be doing other, more economically productive, work.
The qualifier to that is that if we didn't pay people to fight crime there would be more of it, and the legitimate economy* would suffer, so having police, legal and penal systems helps to protect the rest of the economy. I still agree that we would all be better off if we had no crime and so no need for those systems, but in the real world we have to have them.
* Criminal activity is of course an economy of its own, but it distorts fair competition and diverts resources to a few people at the expense of many. Oh, hang on, isn't that the City of London? [/gets coat]
* Criminal activity is of course an economy of its own, but it distorts fair competition and diverts resources to a few people at the expense of many. Oh, hang on, isn't that the City of London? [/gets coat]
Breadvan72 said:
One way in which violence was reduced in Northern Ireland was by massive investment in the economy of the region, as people are often less keen on fighting when they have stuff. The fact that Northern Ireland was skint before exacerbated the violence, and it's notable that recent revivals of violence have coincided with economic difficulty.
Going very off topic here, but I suspect the same principle applies to the poor Islamic regions of the world and the success or otherwise of terrorist groups to gather support.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff