AI gave me the following bones of contention on this topic:

The question of whether or not lawyers are “economic parasites” or “rentiers” is a complex, critical debate.

Some economists argue that an excess of lawyers (especially “rent-seeking” ones using legal clout for wealth redistribution) can hinder growth, while others highlight their crucial role in enforcing contracts, reducing uncertainty, and facilitating commerce.

The “parasite” label reflects historical complaints and modern critiques of excessive litigation or lobbying for special favours or prolongation of public inquiries.

It’s not a simple yes/no; it depends on the lawyer’s function—productive (facilitating deals, ensuring justice) versus non-productive (creating unnecessary disputes, lobbying for artificial advantages, running up huge costs often at taxpayers’ expense).

And some of the “deals” they claim to facilitate may not be in the best interests of society, or members of pension schemes?

Arguments for the “Parasite/Rentier” View

* Rent-Seeking Behaviour: Lawyers can use political and legal influence to create or exploit regulations (like patents or complex rules) to extract wealth (rents), rather than creating new wealth, acting as a drain on the economy.

* Excessive Litigation: A large number of lawyers might encourage unnecessary lawsuits, increasing costs and diverting resources from productive activities, as seen in some economic studies suggesting an optimal number exists, but arguably we seem to have more than that optimal number in practice.

* Lobbying & Tax Avoidance:Lawyers are often employed by large corporations or high net worth individuals or trusts to lobby for favourable legislation or navigate tax loopholes, which some critics label as rent-seeking that undermines fair markets.

Arguments Against the “Parasite/Rentier” View

* Economic Facilitators: Lawyers are essential for enforcing contracts, protecting property rights, and reducing business uncertainty, which are fundamental to a functioning market economy.

* Productive Roles: They enable complex transactions, help innovate by structuring new businesses (like tech firms), and provide vital services, even if those services are costly.

* Good vs. Bad Actors: The legal profession itself isn’t monolithic; many lawyers perform essential societal functions, and “good” lawyers are needed to counter those who might engage in unproductive practices.

Conclusion

The “parasite” or “rentier” label often points to lawyers who engage in wealth redistribution through political influence or frivolous litigation rather than wealth creation, a redistribution seen in other “professional” sectors too (like finance).

However, lawyers also provide critical, productive services that underpin economic activity, making it more of a spectrum based on their specific roles, but with an oversupply potentially tipping the net balance towards unproductive rent-seeking.

The silence of lawyers, some of whom you say read these blogs, Henry, is deafening.