|
"Made a billion dollars of fees? Sure. But to have billions of dollars in his pocket? Very doubtful."
The issue was never dollars-in-pocket, Sakky -- it was simply whether any lawyers "make" a billion dollars. While we're on the subject, I'm sure most investment bankers also have to share many of their proceeds with partners, employees, overhead, etc.
"And the key is that he wasn't working for somebody else or wasn't even a partner of a major firm - he founded and ran his own firm. So, really, he was not really a pure lawyer as such, but actually a hybrid lawyer/entrepreneur. But OK, fine, I will accept that there is one billionaire who made his money off lawsuits."
So now someone who opens his own firm is not really a "pure" lawyer, but rather a "hybrid lawyer/entrepreneur"? News to me.
The truth is, legal knowledge and experience can help people make tons of money in various different fields, including real estate and other investments. I'm not sure why we'd arbitrarily remove these earnings from consideration of how much someone makes in his career as an attorney.
"Compare that to all the billionaires who made their money from banking/high-finance, and I think my point still stands - it's easier to make more money from banking than from law."
No one ever disputed this. The one point I contested was the idea that "[e]ven the highest paid lawyer can be outearned by even a mid-level investment banker." I think we can agree this is an exaggeration. The most successful attorneys do in fact earn more than most mid-level investment bankers.
"Susan777, perhaps you wouldn't call John Edwards "legendary," but I'm not alone in doing so."
I'm sure there's plenty of people that would consider any decent trial lawyer "legendary". However, North Carolina is not exactly the most competitive pool.
"And, I would hardly call hard fought victories in front of impartial juries on behalf of seriously injured plaintiffs "screwing" the insurance companies. Sounds more like the leagl system working to me."
If you consider a system that drives up everyone's health-care costs, and therefore make health-care insurance unaffordable for many people, "working", then I guess I can't really argue with you. Let's just be clear that Edward's fortune was obtained to the detriment of most Americans. (Juries may be "impartial", but they are also easily swayed by emotional appeals, even when there is little or no actual evidence of negligence. In my opinion, this is one area that should probably be ajudicated by educated judges, not juries.)
|