Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop
OK. But most CEOs are more concerned about the next quarterly figures, no?
It is absolutely true that she has no private-sector experience. For better or worse, you could say the same thing about most justices. As we all know, in-house lawyers are brain-dead automatons who aren't really professionals but slavishly do their corporate masters' bidding. Not a gig for a real lawyer, right?
|
Absolutely. 75% climb a corp ladder through politics, luck and some ability, then crow about how they're the reason the company had a spectacular quarter and, when a few quarters later the business cycle isn't as kind to the company, they parachute out and joint the free agent market. It's a fucked system. The "talent" justification is a bad fucking joke.
How's an in-house lawyer dumb? If you've the choice of billing your time like a factory shlep in a firm, or getting paid a similar amount to work in house, how's it even a decision? Could there ever be a question on which to pick? Of course, choosing the much better of two evils doesn't make one brilliant, but it's much closer to that than "brain dead." Quite opposed, I'd say.
