Moderation Questions

Sadly, that was unintentional.

I suspected as much, you should have just kept schtum and taken the credit!

I think he means he gifted them a webcam or something.

If his "side project" existed at all, I'm sure you are correct that it was only one woman. I can see the thread now: "AMA about how I convinced my brother's old lady to get naked on camera so I could take a shot at the 1-3 NLH game at the Venetian"

I was referring to the fact that he notoriously always gets "woman"/"women" mixed up because plurals are hard, but this also works.

mongidig, moony - whatever.

Iron Mong.

That would be a great undertitle

Indeed. Make it so, ensign.

I think his big idea was the theory of surplus value, i.e. that capitalists derive profit from the difference between the value of the labourer's work and the amount he gets paid for it. Which isn't entirely untrue all the time, but it's simplistic idiot economics and assumes that profit is somehow not necessary. You can judge Marx by his prediction that the revolution would definitely occur in England, where liberal policies would enable it, and definitely not in Russia, where repressive policies would prevent it. Oops.

Speaking of Marx and actual moderation question, is Karl's ban permanent or temporary ?

Finally some real politics in the politics forum.

Live nlhe tournament 22 left pays 13. Blinds 2.5k/5k with a 5k bb ante and I have 88 utg with around 85k. I raise to 13k and a player in late position shoves for 41k.

Is this a call or fold?

Any reads on the player?

Its an ICM fold but **** that mess

sure the labor theory of value (LTV) he formalized first. the theory existed as something refuted usually at his time, he formalized that as the basis for his model.

but people these days, even leftists, don't deny capital has a role in production, so the LTV is completely dead.

btw the LTV not only prescribes no profit, it prescribes no remuneration for capital.

economic profit is these days considered only the part above the automatic remuneration of capital at that time in the economy (risk free rate).

under LTV capital has to get a complete 0.

which begs the question "why would anyone employ capital under those conditions instead of just spending everything he earns".

even low IQ leftists these days understand they wouldn't invest a single penny if they had no remuneration in mind for it so nobody would ever do so you can't have an economy if capital isn't remunerated.

not so much for concept such as alienation (purportedly caused by capitalism) or "exploitation".

normal people routinely say they are "exploited" if their employer plays some 0 sum games better than they do.

No reads I had just gotten moved to the table a couple orbits back and hadn't seen him do anything other than limp in a spot where I shoved from the big blind and got it through. I think it was an open limp from him there so probably a weaker player and I'd been somewhat aggro in the little bit I'd been at the table.

People who aim to eliminate this economic exploitation don’t seem to understand reality. They are ‘reality blank slatists’.

Reality has already declared its position on this. You can contain the exploitation. You can limit the harm of the exploitation. But if you make a strong push to eliminate the exploitation, then you will ruin your country.

Yeah I think the idea of folding 88 to an 8 bb shove seems pretty ridiculous especially after I've already invested 2.5 bb but the prospect of flipping at best for half my stack right before I have to go through the blinds isn't too appealing either.

grunching: Call

edit: If he's playing 'Kill Phil', he's shipping 66+, ATs+, AQ+*

*shipping lighter ofc if only 7-man table.

You are dominating: 77, 66: 12
You are small favorite: ATs, AJs, AQ+: 40
You are dominated: 99+: 24

Seems close though.

Straight fold IMO, doubt dude is shipping 22-77 over a UTG open here if he open limps in (any) other spots. If he doesn't ship 22-77 it's a straight fold, at best you're flipping half your stack. You still have 14bb left after folding which you can open jam with a pretty wide range in the next orbit or two.

Anyway, no strat in P&S.

I doubt he jams all those hands. Probably closer to 1010+, AQ+. Rest of your range might well just call, 66 or worse might even fold. It's a live game, I assume a relatively low stakes one. People are trying to cash that close to the money, not go home ruing that they jammed 66 or A10 and ended up dominated and busted. Basically this shove is way stronger than it "should" be for the stack size.

ETA: Not sure A10s or AJs is a jam over a UTG open here. Runs into AQ and AK too much. 109s and J10s might be though, esp if we think UTG will open AJ and fold to a jam. If we have J10s/109s and we're called by AQ/AK we're not in terrible shape.

Dude it's probably like 52% fold 48% call, so it would really just come down to do I want to leave early to beat the traffic or stay because I just ordered some food.

Depends on reads of all the players. Are they mainly maga?

Fast track to heaven, though?