• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • They Should Have Been Lawyers

    At some point in every law school, students are taught the old lawyer’s trick of “inconsistent pleadings.” The classic example of this involves a case where someone is accused to borrowing someone’s teapot and breaking it. The (perfectly legal) defense can simultaneously be:

    1. I didn’t borrow the teapot
    2. The teapot is not broken, AND
    3. The teapot was broken when I borrowed it.

    That is exactly the game the UAW is playing by simultaneously arguing:

    1. We don’t get paid more than non-UAW auto workers
    2. We can’t possibly accept a pay cut to non-UAW levels, AND
    3. We have already agreed to reduce our pay to non-UAW levels.

    The UAW is wasting their talent on the assembly line. They should have all been lawyers.

    Posted in Economics [slideshow_deploy]

    One Response to They Should Have Been Lawyers

    1. Pingback: They Should Have Been Lawyers « Conservative Thoughts and Profundity

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×