wut, no love for this ?

Ya North Korea sounds like a great place to live. Stalinist Russia seemed pretty wonderful too.

Without lawyers how many civil rights do you think you would enjoy? I may be wrong about this but aren't their lawyers or people with legal educations fighting for the rights of poker players in the US right now? Some doctors and cops are scumbags too, but no reasonable person would say that the world would be a wonderful place without them. You could say however that the world would be a better place if there was no NEED for them.

So what? Poker players aren't nearly as bad as lawyers when it comes to leechery. You could make the argument that anyone who lives in the first-world is a titanic leech and props up his lifestyle on the backs of billions of disenfranchised people the world around. My point is that a lawyer does this and participates in a trade that sews misery far and wide, with examples simply too numerous to list. We really don't need yet another person engaging in this petty and disreputable trade.

Poker players help out with income redistribution, which is something the world could probably use a little more of. What's the loss if Guy Laliberte plows hundreds of millions of dollars into the poker economy? Who cares if some incredibly rich guy wants to donk off millions of dollars at poker? That's just money he can't use to employ some army of lawyers to leverage his wealth and subjugate thousands with. Yes, there are certainly a lot of busto degenerates living on the fringes who piss away their last dollar at poker, but if it weren't poker it would be horse racing or blackjack or whatever else; and those people would be far more efficient at it. The professional player isn't the villain here. The system is simply broken and some people get ****ed.

In fact, after this degenerate is down to his last dollar, the poker players won't have anything else to do with him. That's when the lawyers come in and try to bleed him for his possessions, and his very liberty, and leave him in debt or in jail. The lawyers, who have helped create the broken system, will then abuse the broken system to leave this individual completely disenfranchised and hopeless.

That's a stupid argument. Just because a lot of people want something doesn't mean you have to want it. Besides which, there are probably quite a few people who would kill for the opportunity to be a professional poker player, to have the freedom that comes from side-stepping the employment system entirely. Some of those people are probably even Harvard law graduates who hate their jobs. So by your own terrible logic he shouldn't pass up the opportunity to play cards for a living.

Give me a break.

This is so stupid I can't even fathom it. Consider the medical profession. Doctors do not go out of their way to make it difficult or overwhelming. Science is exacting and demanding, and doctors must follow natural laws when dealing with patients. Anything arcane about it is a product of those very natural laws, and doctors can't do anything to make anatomy or genetics or epidemiology or any medical field more arcane than it already is. Lawyers, on the other hand, are constantly figuring out ways to abuse the system, to find loopholes, and to engage in the production of disingenuous and immoral corporate practices. Endless abuses across banking, insurance, medical malpractice, lobbying, and so on are the product of us having too many lawyers getting involved in too many areas of our lives. The UIGEA is an example of such shenanigans. Bill Frist may have rammed it through, but you can rest assured that it was penned by some lawyer(s) working for some corporate interest somewhere and handed over to him to be made into law.

This is rerouted to very wealthy people. It may then get rerouted again by poker players if those very wealthy people happen to be degenerates. We're not always so lucky, though.

That's a matter of opinion, and I think your opinion is dead wrong. The average lawyer is hugely -EV IMO. I think you underestimate the sheer volume of corporate lawyers who are, this very instant, figuring out a way to better fleece you out of your monies.

So, an attack on motives when your arguments crumble the instant they come out of your mind? My personal experiences are irrelevant to my case that lawyers are -EV.

Yes it is. Now he's not going to be some dbag lawyer making the world a worse place for us and our children.

They're also the ones fighting against the rights of poker players right now. And so far the bad guys are winning. Probably because they have more lawyers doing more dirty deeds.

My point still stands even if you didn't like the (extreme) example.

Maybe you should think more about why the bad guys are winning. And what could be done.

No, it isn't. I thought it was common knowledge that law school is pretty much a joke.

so awesome

Lots of fkking idiotic dorks in this thread. And FWF is their Dork King.

"Any lawyer worth his salt could tell you you've just constructed a 100% ******ed straw man."

PROTIP: People don't choose to be born into the first world. Try again.

LOL. Yeah, poker players help out with income redistribution... from degens to rich folk. You're seriously presenting "income redistribution" like it's a positive thing? The likes of Guy Laliberte and Andy Beal worked damn hard for their money and they can spunk millions away without any consequences. Usually to an elite group of top players who are millionaires anyway. But you know full well that the vast majority of people losing money online aren't multi-millionaires donking off six figures they'll never miss for fun. They're the addicts, the degens, the desperate and the misguided. Not all total down-and-outs who can't afford to lose the money, but partly. Without them, winning players would just shuffle money around aimlessly. And saying that people would lose money gambling without poker is no defence of poker at all, just a condemnation of gambling as a whole.

By the way, lawyers aren't the villains. The system is simply broken and some people just get ****ed. Is this argument a valid defence of lawyers? If not, how is your argument a valid defence of poker players?

Gosh, it just gets better and better! Poker players aren't the bad guys because they only take all of somebody's money and then discard them because broke people are useless? Gee, you make it sound so honourable. Lawyers are at least acting for the benefit of the companies who hire them; they don't take people's possessions or argue to have them jailed unless they default on mortgage payments or something, which the degen in your example only did because poker players took all his money. If lawyers didn't do that and let gambling degens stop paying bills because blew all their money and have families to feed, the companies that hire them would go under and then everybody who's dependent on them gets ****ed. You make lawyers sound like neo-Nazis hell-bent on the annihilation of freedom, equality and liberty. They're not.

Thanks for misinterpreting me. Did you do it deliberately for the sake of argument, or did you just misunderstand what I was saying?

Being a professional poker player is something that anybody with reasonable intelligence and a good work ethic can do. There are no barriers to entry. Want to be a pro? Buy some books, sign up to Cardrunners and start grinding. Work your way up. Make yourself the best. There's no obstactle to prevent anybody becoming a pro player; if someone would "kill to be a professional poker player", they should put in the hours and avoid the murder charge.

A place at Harvard Law School is something that many, many people work towards for years and don't get. You need a lot of luck and opportunity to do it, as well as a lot of money behind you; a kid from a poor neighbourhood who went to a mediocre high school will practically never get to Harvard even if he's intelligent and dedicated, however much he wants it, but those same qualities could make him a professional poker player.

The guy this thread is about was privileged to get that opportunity. I have no idea what his thoughts about law school were, but in my opinion passing up something that will pretty much guarantee you a six-figure income in a wide variety of fields by the time you're 30 is a dumb move even if you're going to find it difficult or unenjoyable in the short term. Especially if you pass it up to do something you could easily do after your degree and even during it to some extent, to do something that's financially unstable and not guaranteed to be profitable forever... not even guaranteed to be around forever. Like I said, it's a -EV move. A professional poker player might make a lot of money and be successful, fair play to the ones that make it, but if you don't end up doing well for yourself you're stuck with no employable qualifications and no work experience. That's the dangerous thing about trying to become a poker pro; if you don't make it, you really, really don't.

Anyway, I didn't sign up to this forum in order to point out flaws in other people's political arguments. I signed up to discuss poker. From the sounds of your "all lawyers are evil bloodsuckers who only care about screwing every person on the planet out of their money and killing innocent children" spiel, you're a) about 18 years old, going through that vocal far-left phase everybody goes through around that age, b) in possession of at least one item of Che Guevara merchandise, possibly a t-shirt, poster or wall clock, and c) really not worth any more of my time. Peace.

Are there this many people that are interested in FWF's life decisions? lol. In the end whatever he decides is what's best for him.

haven't been reading this discussion of law school's merits b/c it's tl;dr, but some observations:

1) HLS is very very hard work if you want to do something with it and succeed. even if you just want to get passes, it's a decent amount of work to avoid looking like an idiot in class

2) anybody talking about the EV of poker vs the EV of lawyering as though it's a purely monetary decision without looking to quality of life is being very very simplistic about this. the work you have to do to be a baller lawyer is extremely demanding and i was never going to law school to be a corporate lawyer. the quality of life is terrible

lol this thread is hilarious. he can go back to law school in a semester or two if he wants, no penalty. (poker fans: that is a freeroll)

not to mention the fact that in a year or two his peers are going to be even closer to settling down, the real world, etc., which makes now a better time to enjoy having a more laid back life. law school will still be there, especially for him.

you are talking about the EV of playing poker in 2008 vs. the EV of being a law student in in 2009. you have no idea what the EV of being a poker player in 2020 will be (after playing poker for ten years) vs. the EV of being a lawyer in 2020.

I'll agree with your second point. I was more speaking out against the ignorant position that lawyers are some consortium equivalent to the prophets of doom. I think thats a negligent misrepresentation of a profession that employs millions of terrific, hard working people.

Yeah the lifestyle of even a "less baller" lawyer is still pretty poor. People see the 160k and they think they're walking into an annual jackpot without proper consideration for the significantly smaller hourly rate you make for your first 5-7 years. Later on it gets far more manageable and much more profitable but you're in essence making decisions now that would benefit your life when you're 45. If you can live a fun comfortable life on poker right now, I say go for it. Hell, I wish I could.

I'm a 2L at The University of Illinois College of Law and I fret pretty often about my post Law School life and how I'm going to make enough money to pay my loans while still living a fun and enjoyable life. So ups to you for maybe cutting your "losses" short.

Sounds craaaaaazzzzzzyyyy. Will be sure to stay tuned to blog for more of said CRAZY stories!

While many of the legislators that passed this law were probably former lawyers it doesn't negate the fact that without lawyers the citizen would have no way of addressing government abuse of power short of violence. The government can essentially pass any law it wants, lawyers are needed to make sure they dont overstep certain bounds.

Also, you seem to be moralizing pretty hard against lawyers. People in glass houses man...

Poker players make a large chunk of their money by exploiting the mistakes, characters flaws, degeneracy and addictions of the "fish". I've seen a couple of threads on this forum from people who ask the question whether they feel bad for taking peoples money who may not be able to afford the loss financially or mentally.

Saying that they would lose their money at bj or craps is a pretty weak moral argument. It's akin to saying that well this crack fiend will just buy somewhere else so i might as well sell it to him.

yay my flip buddy is back!

Comments in bold.

Thanks. You basically bolded all of the dumb parts of that post, most of which I had already addressed. Just as an example, the poster's objection to me saying to blame the system, not poker players, when it comes to degenerates losing their money and how that argument could apply to lawyers. It doesn't apply to lawyers because lawyers are working to make the system worse, to **** it up even more. I said that already, but this guy didn't seem to catch it.

Anyway, that's enough about that. I'm not going to continue to repeat myself to a bunch of people who only seem to have the ability to blithely ignore any points with which they cannot contend; I won't be trolled by a bunch of irrational lawyer lovers.

I'll just say what I said before: I applaud FWF for his decision. I think he has made the morally superior choice and that the world will be better off for his having done so. A tip of the cap to you, sir.

So you base your entire opinion on a major assumption (that lawyers are marking the system worse to mess it up more) and you have the audacity to accuse multiple other reasonable individuals that THEY are ignoring points?

Do me a favor...call your local community college and take Intro to philosophy. It would probably benefit your greatly.

Agreed. Law school is not hard. I can't say anything about harvard or other american schools because i go to a canadian school(letter grades, not pass/fail, on a curve). You do, however, get a bit busier around exams when trying to learn a semesters worth of class in 2 or 3 days.

Who is this guy?

I don't think some guy dropping out of school is reason to start a thread in "News, Views, and Gossip." No one outside of this board has ever heard of him and he probably doesn't want embarrassing info like this broadcast in a thread, anyway.

Waiting for the barrage.

Do any lawyers even like their jobs?