PDA

View Full Version : Is Poker Socially Useful?: Part I by Alan N. Schoonmaker, Ph.D.


Non_Comformist
12-26-2004, 12:35 AM
Great Job Doctor Al, my favorite article this month. I look foward to the mext installment.

Nacarno
12-26-2004, 05:39 AM
While I also enjoyed the article, I was left wondering...

I agree that poker is a great medium that teaches competitiveness, but if a person applies those lessons only to poker, where is society's gain?

At least in my experience, those who claim that poker has no societal use are usually refering to professional players with no other job. If the poker player in question has a "day job" and plays poker as an addition source of income (rather than his or her only source), then people tend to view it as a hobby and they don't seem to take as much issue with it. Am I wrong here? Do others have similar or different experiences?

Going back to my original question, I'm still having a hard time seeing society's gain from someone who applies his competitive drive only to poker and not to another vocation. Perhaps this will be discussed in part 2?

Boltsfan1992
12-26-2004, 09:46 AM
Hiya -

Right now, I play poker as a hobby. I have a steady, secure full time job with benefits, and I'm still learning the game. However, my competitive drive compels me to learn as much as possible so that I don't become a weak player. Therefore, I read, study, and play as much as I possibly can.

The competition from poker has bled into my workplace in positive ways. I handle conflict better, without the emotional issues, my evaluation skills have improved recognizing what my weaknesses are and what I need to do improve them, and finally, I recognize the battles where I will lose and recognize those that I can win and act appropriately.

I do not think that is true for MOST of the hobbyist poker players right now, so in that sense you are right. However, I think the overall theme of Dr. Al's article addressed how competition is being squelched overall. I think schools can err on both sides - having learning situations so competitive that the weakest have no chance to succeed, but being so bland that everybody wins. There has to be moderation and there has to be some value on competition.

If the recreational player can learn to apply the skills learned at the poker table to life pursuits, then society would improve. But many do not know how or care to learn the game with any depth to have these skills carry over, and I think that is a reflection of our society not wanting to learn how to learn more than anything else. Self-evaluation is difficult, but once applied, can be a very useful tool in living life better.

PB

ZeeBee
12-26-2004, 12:12 PM
Am I the only person who found this article very, very disapointing.

While I agree with much of the sentiment of the article, Alan presents no actual evidence to support his opinions.

While the statements from the educators implying that "cometition is bad" made me wince - I would like to see evidence as to whether their policies work or not before condemning them. Although stifling competition seems bad at face value, there are many cases where what works and what doesn't in education (as with many other areas) is counterintuitive (e.g. there is significant evidence to show that many incentive schemes which look good on paper actually have a negative effect). I am surprised that 2+2 - the home of "fighting fuzzy thinking" - promote such a weak analysis.

And as to the assertion that "Because of anti-competitive attitudes, our economy and living standards are at risk. In a few decades America has gone from being the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor...", forgive my stupidty, but isn't your national debt rather more to do with budgetary policy than 'anti-competitive attitudes'.

Don't get me wrong, I'm absolutely in favour of competition - but in my view we should be applauding articles because of the quality of their analysis, not just because we happen to agree with the points beign put forward. This article may have a good point to make, but the analysis and evidence used to support it is shoddy.

ZB

Clarkmeister
12-26-2004, 01:44 PM
I agree with the sentiment that Al's section relating to the US economy left much to be desired. In particular, the trade deficit is essentially meaningless, and the national debt is an acceptible % of GDP.

MicroBob
12-26-2004, 03:46 PM
I found it to be an interesting article. There are some aspects I agree with...others I didn't. But it did make me think.

Some thoughts/observations:

I think the incidents of downplaying competitivenes in American schools may be exaggerated (although I have no data or evidence for this opinion).
There are many situations I'm sure of where some honor-society student commits suicide because they couldn't deal with the pressure and eventual disappointment of NOT making valedictorian or first-flute in the orchestra, or whatever.

There are many suburbs in America where all you need to do is swing by a little-league soccer or baseball game to draw an opposite conclusion from what Dr. Al represents in the article: That we are actually getting a bit carried-away by our competitiveness and are perhaps pushing our kids to hard.

Seems that the incidents that Dr. Al sited were just exaggerated rebound-responses to some of the over-competitiveness that is out there.

A little balance would be appropriate of course. Fostering SOME degree of competitiveness without going over-board and putting an excessive amount of pressure on our youth.


I feel my background had a fine amount of balance in competitiveness.
I have always been a fairly competitive person even though my parents never really pushed me a whole lot. I simply enjoyed competing.
My Dad taught me to play chess when I was 6 and we played every single night. I was determined to beat him and I eventually did when I was 9. I never got frustrated. I just liked trying to play.
When I would play with my friends it was kind of boring because I was so much better than them and there was no challenge.

Since I was so small growing up I had little chance to succeed too much in physical sports....but I enjoyed the experience of playing as hard as I could...and still do.
I played in a couple of adult-soccer leagues this year...I'm 34 and was trying to run-around and keep up with faster and bigger 25 year-olds (with only marginal success).


I played little-league baseball (I was awful) and my Dad was our coach for a couple of years. We had a competitive drive and succeeded without any pressure. Just go out and have fun and play hard.
But we did whatever it took to win...pulling the 'hidden-ball trick' or telling the umpire that their player should be out because he took his helmet off while the ball was still in play.
you can play hard and be nit-picky about the rules in your efforts to win without enforcing a "if you don't throw a strike your world is going to come to an end" type of mentality.
We had the least amount of talent in the league but finished 8-6. If we lost we were okay....because we put forth a solid effort and played hard.

Later in college...I was an umpire in that same little-league for $8/gm.
For some reason we didn't have any mightmare issues with parents that are common-place elsewhere. The kids played hard and enjoyed themselves. Even the team that was grossly out-manned and lost virtually every game 25-2 before eventually winning their last game of the year I think benefitted from the lessons of little-league baseball.


I worked for a couple of individuals who were die-hard Tennessee football fans. Would drive 7+ hours for every home game, etc.
If Tennessee lost they took it very personally to the extent that they would get extremely depressed. They just took the games WAY too seriously.

I believe I have read of studies that fans who take too much joy or sadness in the results of their pro or college sports team typically have other psychological issues (perhaps including not enough involvement with one's family while growing-up although I can't remember for sure).


Okay - One last little tale...sorry...I know it's long.
Dr. Al's article reminded me of my grade-school gym-teacher (named Richard Simmons....seriously, that was his real name).
We would be playing soccer or basketball or something and Mr. Simmons would wait for the game to be tied...and THEN he would blow his whistle signalling the end of the game and the end of gym-class for the day.
"Final score is 9-9!! It's a tie so EVERYBODY WINS!!"
All of 4th graders were REALLY pissed-off every time he did that. We would call him "Mr. 'Everybody-Wins!!' Simmons" because he did it so much.
15-20 years later I worked with Mr. Simmons for several years in a college-athletics environment (he was no longer a gym teacher) and he was actually just as interested in the results of the home team as the next guy. I think he did the Tie-Score thing for us 4th graders because he saw that we were taking the game TOO seriously.
no real point....just a funny little story that the article reminded me of.

theBruiser500
12-27-2004, 04:58 AM
Alan - good article, you have good thoughts. I disagree with one prat though

"Many people would say, "No," but they would be wrong"

Poker is very complex and how it interacts with society is very complex I don't think we can know for sure one way or the other if it is good for society or bad. I think it's a alot more accurate to say something like "poker has socially useful aspects" or something like that, anyway you should get the idea of w hat I'm saying.

Microbob - please make your posts shorter, everyone of them is an essay.

soah
12-27-2004, 07:54 AM
[ QUOTE ]
I think the incidents of downplaying competitivenes in American schools may be exaggerated (although I have no data or evidence for this opinion).

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're quite wrong about this. When I was in high school (which was not very long ago) there was actually an effort made to eliminate all honors and advanced placement classes on the premise that all of the students were equally intelligent. Supposedly the disparity in results was entirely due to self-esteem and the higher-quality instruction that some students received in their honors courses. It "wasn't fair" that some students were singled out for special treatment (even though each student had the option to sign up for whichever course they wanted).

I recall at one sporting event where an announcement was made which began: "At the conclusion of the match, the non-winner will...."

Grade inflation is very real as well. C is most certainly not average, a C is bad. The honor roll is such a joke that they'd be better off eliminating it -- to not make the list is actually pretty embarrassing since nearly everyone makes it.

MicroBob
12-27-2004, 08:43 AM
Well....not quite EVERY one of them.

But you are correct, I get rather wordy far too much.
When the caffeine hits me I guess I can't shut-up.

My apologies.



Soah - Perhaps I wasn't aware of the length of this problem. Your school situation sounds really ridiculous.

i made the honor-society (just barely really) in H.S. I think we had 40 members out of a class of 350 which I think is a reasonable number.

You're right that a C is certainly not the average.
I'm reminded of several Fox-Trot comic strips where the nerdy kid is upset that he only got an A++ and that is going to completely screw-up his A++++++ average.

Smallyea
12-27-2004, 02:51 PM
Greetings.

Would someone be so kind as to provide a link or info relating to accessing the footnoted article on "Ten lessons poker teaches great investors"?

Thanks to all, and special thanks to twoplustwo for giving us another great resource.

Lawrence Ng
12-28-2004, 02:49 AM
[ QUOTE ]
While I agree with much of the sentiment of the article, Alan presents no actual evidence to support his opinions.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is not a thesis. Mason also placed a restriction to the length of the articles.

[ QUOTE ]
And as to the assertion that "Because of anti-competitive attitudes, our economy and living standards are at risk. In a few decades America has gone from being the world's largest creditor to the world's largest debtor...", forgive my stupidty, but isn't your national debt rather more to do with budgetary policy than 'anti-competitive attitudes'.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the attitude of anti-competitiveness is surely one of the key driving forces behind sloppy budgetary and monetary policy, is it not? The fact that that America is importing far more than than it's able to export in terms or goods and services now goes down to a micro-economic and fundamental level that something is just wrong. And the heart of that problem severely lies within the competitive spirit.

It may be an area where little literature exists, but to deny it is dangerous.

The primary example, is within the Automobile Industry. For over 20 years Americans had the important dominance in the automotive sector. Yet, in the 80's they lost huge market gains across the world to the Japanese and Europeans. Why? Because the Japanese and Europeans got smart, competed and thrived on it while the Americans sat back and refused to change.

I don't want to go into a thesis here, but without competitivess, the detriment to society is harmful to say the least. When China and Russia when through heavy reform during the 60's and 70's under Communism, competition ceased to exist and the result was chaos, poor quality of goods and services, and an economy in turmoil.

Lawrence

pokeraz
12-28-2004, 10:54 AM
Not only is this article dissapointing but dangerous in its thinking. The author seems to advocate that a young persons' (or the nations' for that matter) future rests on learning to gamble. Yes gamble. While the card game of poker may have valuable, certainly teaching Americas' youth to gamble in order to succeed in life borders on the ludicris.

Maybe I'll go read the article again. Surely I misread it.

itsmarty
12-28-2004, 04:11 PM
[ QUOTE ]
In mid-November Alan Greenspan, the Federal Reserve Chairman, stated that our trade deficit threatens the economy, and the stock market dropped precipitously. It may have been news to the public, but it should have been obvious that we could not continue indefinitely to spend more than we earn.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know what the author's phd is in, but we can eliminate Economics from discussion.

The trade deficit means we spend more overseas than people overseas spend here, not that we spend more than we earn.

Martin

Sluss
12-28-2004, 06:19 PM
I don't think the article advocates gambling for teenagers. What the article does do is point out a problem that is arising in our school system.

With a wife and mother who are teachers and a father who is a school administration I have heard these horror stories. From removing dodgeball because it is too competitive. To teachers being approached to raise grades because the child has "low self esteem." "No child left behind" removing subjects such as history from school. There are also stories from Ivy league schools about two different grades. One grade for the student and one for the permanent record of the student. Because god forbid, if someone was to get a B it would destroy their chance to get a big time job.

There is a glaring lack of competitive spirit in schools and this may be what is drawing so many teenagers to poker to start with. It feeds the competive drive that some kids have. One that I know I had that poker filled and fills very well.

A great article that I passed on to my father and wife, really outlines a true problem. Interesting solution, that would have little traction. Still very thought provoking, which I believe was the true intent.

Toonces
12-28-2004, 07:12 PM
[ QUOTE ]
From removing dodgeball because it is too competitive.

[/ QUOTE ]

For the record, I think the major imputus for removing dodgeball is that it is an "elimination game", and thus the first people knocked out get little exercise, as well as promoting bullying, I assume.

Al Schoonmaker
12-29-2004, 02:12 AM
You must distinguish between the national debt and our massively negative trade balance.
The national debt is money owed by the government because of budget deficits. It is trillions of dollars. Some of it is owed to foreigners, some to Americans. It is not directly related to our lack of competitiveness.
The trade deficit is caused by our buying more from foreign sources than we sell in foreign markets. It is many billions of dollars per month. We simply can't compete in many markets.
It appears that I was not clear enough. I wrote: "we are losing the world's most important competition." I was referring ONLY to international trade. If we don't win that competition, it is literally impossible for us to preserve our international position and standard of living. You, I, and our economy as a whole must either earn more than we spend or pay severe consequences.
To put it in poker terms, if you lose a lot of money every month, sooner or later you don't have a bankroll.
Regards,
Al

Zetack
12-29-2004, 02:20 AM
I had some similar reactions as MicroBob.

I do think Poker is socially useful, but because it teaches competitiveness in a pure meritocracy?

Our culture is a great big messy, sloshy morass of competing and often contradictory impulses, ideas, and directions. But to suggest that competition is being eradicated and devalued in our culture instead of glorified is to look at our world through a bizarre set of blinders. Competition is glorified and promoted in so many different areas that its hard to avoid it, from sports to business, to--I don't know--American Idol?

Go on, just for fun, why don't you sit down and think of a dozen endeavors, areas, activities where competition is embraced, promoted, glorified. Or heck, why not two dozen, or three, or a hundred? I bet you can do it.

Are there also places and impulses to mute competition, to promote alternative values? Sure. But to suggest that somehow the spirit of competition is being wrung out of our culture because of that is simply to deny reality.

But even if you were to take the loss of competitiveness as a given, the idea that Poker is tremendously valuable in teaching competitiveness is also silly. To begin with, you can't even get to play serious poker (generally speaking) until you are 18 or even 21--if you don't know anything about competition by then its getting a little late, and in any case, life is certainly going to start slapping you in the face with the necessity to compete in the world at that point.

And a meritocracy? Bah. I'd suggest that there are tremendous numbers of losing poker players who aren't even aware that they are losing poker players. Good lessons it merit being learned by all eh? And unlike sports, where, although luck often plays a factor, a great athlete or team at the peak of it's performance can often take luck out of the equation, a great poker player can be at the peak of his skill, playing his best and be crushed in any given session, any given tournament and even in a long series of sessions or tournaments.

Nine people at the final table of the WSOP, how many of the top 30 players in the world made it there? Heck how many of the top 30 players in the tournament made it? One?

Over the long term poker may be a ruthless meritocracy, but its been demonstrated on this forum many times that the long term is incredibly long...too long I would suggest for it be a meritocracy in fact or appearance for the vast majority of players.

Not very well expressed on my part perhaps, but hopefully the gist is there.

--Zetack

Al Schoonmaker
12-29-2004, 02:23 AM
You wrote: "Still very thought provoking, which I believe was the true intent."

You're right. I had hoped to get a rather different discussion going, and it appears I've succeeded.

Let's look at poker in as many ways as possible.

But let's never forget that it's just a game, and that is should never become too important to us.

I am appalled by the stories and posts I've read about students' failing exams because they have played too much poker.

Regards,

Al

Zetack
12-29-2004, 02:30 AM
[ QUOTE ]
You must distinguish between the national debt and our massively negative trade balance.
The national debt is money owed by the government because of budget deficits. It is trillions of dollars. Some of it is owed to foreigners, some to Americans. It is not directly related to our lack of competitiveness.
The trade deficit is caused by our buying more from foreign sources than we sell in foreign markets. It is many billions of dollars per month. We simply can't compete in many markets.
It appears that I was not clear enough. I wrote: "we are losing the world's most important competition." I was referring ONLY to international trade. If we don't win that competition, it is literally impossible for us to preserve our international position and standard of living. You, I, and our economy as a whole must either earn more than we spend or pay severe consequences.
To put it in poker terms, if you lose a lot of money every month, sooner or later you don't have a bankroll.
Regards,
Al

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know enough economics to assess the validty of the above. However, I question the trade imbalance being a function of our being outcompeted by the rest of the world. I would suggest instead that it is the incredible comptetitive drive of americans that has created vast national wealth with which to out consume the rest of the world. (Or perhaps we are simply more competitive consumers /images/graemlins/smile.gif ). And the ruthless comptetive spirit of american businesses which lead them to internationalize, to seek any comptetive advantage and to produce goods in locations outside the United States.

Just a thought.

--Zetack

fimbulwinter
12-29-2004, 08:06 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Great Job Doctor Al, my favorite article this month. I look foward to the mext installment.

[/ QUOTE ]

hear hear. i bought psychology of poker after having read this article. Dont feel so good about myself after having read the section on loose, agressive players... /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

fim

illguitar
12-29-2004, 04:19 PM
You did. This was the best article on poker I have ever read. If you want to convince your family thatpoker is okay, email them a copy.

-Daver

Grisgra
12-29-2004, 05:57 PM
[ QUOTE ]

Over the long term poker may be a ruthless meritocracy, but its been demonstrated on this forum many times that the long term is incredibly long...too long I would suggest for it be a meritocracy in fact or appearance for the vast majority of players.
--Zetack

[/ QUOTE ]

Well expressed and on-the-nose . . . I think that poker has a lot going for it (not the least of which is emotional control in the face of Unfairness, i.e., bad beats) but as far as the meritocracy angle goes -- yeeks. No way. The long run is just a little too long.

IMHO a little bit too much of an Ayn-Randian rant on his part, but eh, whattya gonna do.

naphand
12-31-2004, 05:47 AM
So, whenever anyone on the Forum or Magazine refers to "we" they are not referring to Canadians, Europeans or other members of the world commnity, they are refrring to the "USA".

I thought the one of the big advantages of an internet magazine and forum, in line with poker rooms, is to create an international community? This article, while I accept that the larger portion of players and forum users are from the USA, is in a style, and uses examples, that refer to USA citizens only.

Quoting american companies (who the hell are "Fidelity"?) and other American examples does not help, talking about the article in terms of what it can do for the USA economy does not help. Do articles on the psychology of poker uniquely apply to the USA? As a regular user of the forum and player of internet poker I am in contact with non-USA people, and it is not an insignificant minority.

I would suggest that if the USA wants to become competitive again, it needs to start recognising the existence and validity of the rest of the world (i.e. the countries that are not the USA) and communicate accordingly. The rest of the world is not "just like" the USA, just because they have a MacDonalds. Articles in this magazine should go beyond national identities and boundaries, and I struggle to understand how this article was published with such a distorted viewpoint. Has the situation in the USA really got that bad? that you feel it is not worth talking about issues outside the USA? If I had penned an article making references to "Tony Benn" and the "Rover Plant outside Dagenham" would anyone outside the UK have a clue what I was talking about?

Clarkmeister
01-01-2005, 02:10 PM
"I would suggest that if the USA wants to become competitive again, it needs to start recognising the existence and validity of the rest of the world"

Yeah, the USA is terribly uncompetitive with the rest of the world. /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

We recognize the existance of the rest of the world, it's where we outsource all our unskilled jobs in order to maximize our profit and wealth. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

naphand
01-01-2005, 03:26 PM
What a lame response.

You say with pointless sarcasm:

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah, the USA is terribly uncompetitive with the rest of the world.

[/ QUOTE ]

And Al says in his article says:

[ QUOTE ]
We must...recognize that we are losing the world's most important competition, and do whatever it takes to start winning again.

[/ QUOTE ]

So are you agreeing or disagreeing with Al? because it sure as hell looks like you are not agreeing. You perhaps belong to the group of Governmental hacks who believe that a huge balance of payments defecit is sustainable... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I am still not sure what the point of your post is, is to demonstrate you have your head buried in the sand? or is to disagree with Al? Or is it post-party alcohol induced bravado?

The fact remains, this forum and magazine are read by people across the world, and I am stunned that anyone would write such an insular and blinkered article. If you want to demonstrate that you care not what the rest of the world thinks and only want to read articles about the good ol' boys and Uncle Sam, then carry on as you are. How utterly disappointing.

Clarkmeister
01-01-2005, 04:10 PM
I disagree with Al's points about the economy, the national debt, and the trade deficit. I mentioned that in my first post in the thread.

"You perhaps belong to the group of Governmental hacks who believe that a huge balance of payments defecit is sustainable"

It is. The national debt is at a more than acceptible level.

"The fact remains, this forum and magazine are read by people across the world, and I am stunned that anyone would write such an insular and blinkered article. If you want to demonstrate that you care not what the rest of the world thinks and only want to read articles about the good ol' boys and Uncle Sam, then carry on as you are. How utterly disappointing."

Sorry, but Al lives in America and that's his experience. While I'm sure that people all over the world read this site, I doubt it's much of a stretch to estimate that more than 95% are American. Besides, what do you expect him to use as his reference? Somewhere he's unfamiliar with? If you had an internet magazine with 95% English readers, I'd have to be pretty out of line to come and demand that you cater specifically to the non-English readers.

Perhaps if people like you got over your inferiority complex, you'd be a lot happier. Al has some bad examples and incorrect conclusions in the article, but using America as his frame of reference is a non-issue.

KingDan
01-01-2005, 04:22 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I I have heard these horror stories. From removing dodgeball because it is too competitive. To teachers being approached to raise grades because the child has "low self esteem." "No child left behind" removing subjects such as history from school.

[/ QUOTE ]

A student a few years ago was heart playing dodgeball, and schools aren't allowed to play it. There are ways around it. I know local schools play "medic" When someone is hit with the ball they are out until the medic touches them and they are back in.

invisibleleadsoup
01-02-2005, 02:22 AM
i'm sorry but this is an appallingly written article...
for a publisher with such a good reputation,i cannot believe twoplustwo published an arguement that starts with the sentence "Many people would say, "No," but they would be wrong. "
i can't fully engage with the arguements since i live in ireland and don't know much about the american education system,but in the irish education system a 15 year old would know that this is an unacceptable way of starting an arguement...
its gets worse-as mentioned,spurious economic generalisations are made,and no effort is made to back up arguements with evidence...
referring to someone quoted as an idiot is not a way to express any arguement unless you are writing for a tabloid newspaper...

someone said this is not meant to be a thesis in its defence:this point is a fallacy worthy of the article itself...
there are plenty of people who are quite capable of explaining a complex arguement succinctly in an article length piece without resorting to the sort of childishness displayed in this one,if mr schoonmaker is incapable of doing so that does not put him beyond criticism
in general i trust twoplustwo as a publisher because i assume that someone who knows more about the topic at hand than me has written something intelligently and that the publishers know enough to filter out this sort of rubbish...

other than that i enjoyed the rest of the magazine,hopefully the rest of the issues will cut out sub-polemic schoolboy arguements....

naphand
01-02-2005, 04:51 AM
[ QUOTE ]
It is. The national debt is at a more than acceptible level.

[/ QUOTE ]

It would be interesting if you could be bothered to explain why and how passing billions of dollars to other economies is "sustainable". If your account is running in the red, your business will go bust. National economies clearly work to different rules, but the basic premise must be the same. But fine, if you are happy to believe this then you can do so, it just might be better to explain your reasoning on something which goes directly against common sense.

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry, but Al lives in America and that's his experience.

[/ QUOTE ]

Please, are you really that ignorant? Al is an educated professional, not a redneck just in from hoeing his fields. You have television in the USA, right? You have an education system that deals with non-US issues, no? This tired old line of "he lives in the USA, so he knows nothing else" is just about the saddest response imaginable, and unfortunately so very typical of the arrogance and dismissiveness of your country today. I would expect any academic to be able to comfortably write an article that made non-geographical references, or at the very least to provide sufficient detail of the used references so that anyone reading the article was aware of their relevance.

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt it's much of a stretch to estimate that more than 95% are American

[/ QUOTE ]

It is always good to back up your claims with statistics, so I am assuming you are guessing. From the posters in the SH forum I would say that a significant minority are non-USA. But the real question is, do you only want to write for USA poker players? If so, then please say so. This is hilarious, considering that not one of the poker rooms acutally runs its business from your country, or is this more "outsourcing low-skilled work"? No-one has said anything about writing in other languages, but that is, in fact a very good idea, if you are interested in a global market. Translation does not cost much, I suggest starting with French and Spanish and consider Japanese (who love to gamble).

[ QUOTE ]
Perhaps if people like you got over your inferiority complex, you'd be a lot happier.

[/ QUOTE ]

How very sad. This is exactly the kind of pompous attitude you accuse the British of having. I have no inferiority complex with the USA, that idea only exists in your superiority complex. I would imagine that that the very huge majority of Europeans much prefer to live here than the USA, your so-called higher living standards (if we can call plastic food, polluted cities and super-high crime/murder rate "higher-standards"). If you really beleive others are jealous, then I suggest it is you that needs to sort your head out and stop using lame excuses for your own arrogance and ignorance. Can you imagine what people over here think of your schools that try to ban "evolution" in biology classes? or the utterly inhumane death sentence (which fails in its aim of reducing violent crime)? or your pitiful Social Security system? your two-tier health care system that condemns vast swathes of your population to effectively no-health care? No probably not, but you just might get the inkling that there is more to life and its enjoyment that the material luxuries you so obviously covet. Culture being one of them. Jealous? Inferior? Grow up.

Clarkmeister
01-02-2005, 05:24 AM
"It would be interesting if you could be bothered to explain why and how passing billions of dollars to other economies is "sustainable". If your account is running in the red, your business will go bust. National economies clearly work to different rules, but the basic premise must be the same."

No, it's not. Businesses of all types operate with constant debt. It's a good thing, not a bad one. Any basic college business course goes over this.

Regarding Al, just because something is published on the internet doesn't mean one is responsible for making it accesible or relevant the the entire friggin planet. Get over yourself.

As for the rest of your post - it's pretty amusing. Are you trying to convince yourself? Unlike you who seem dying for us to acknowledge the validity of other countries' values and systems, we don't give a rats ass if you think ours is valid or not. Cheers.

naphand
01-02-2005, 05:55 AM
I am well aware that business operate with constant debt, but they do not operate with a constant loss. This is a difference that "any basic business course" would teach, as well.

[ QUOTE ]
making it accesible or relevant the the entire friggin planet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your childishness knows no bounds, it seems. I have never made the point that is should be accessible to the entire population of the planet. In fact you could say I was just suggesting the English-speaking world. From a marketing perspective, I would have thought that translation into other languages would be considered a good thing; you may have noticed the internet is global. The Magazine is clearly a promotional vehicle (there are no sales revenues directly associated with it) and no reason why it should not appeal to non-English speaking countries. Why you have a problem with this is beyond me, but you do seem to have a problem with the rest of the world in general, do you feel threatened? Oh yes, you do don't you...

As a "minority" I have every right to ask that such articles be written in a style that reflects the international community, my request is entirely reasonable. I am also suprised that this is not SOP, as it must be apparent that there are a lot of non-USA readers. The article was incredibly insular, and from a professional such as Al I expected more consideration for this. You of course, don't care, but I am not interested in your xenophobic attitudes, merely in being able to read articles are accessible to the readership. This really is not difficult to achieve, so does not present any large obstacles. Why you have a problem with this notion is beyond me, though it it clear you personally have difficulty expressing yourself coherently and with consideration for others. If that is the image you wish to portray then you are merely confirming the stereotypic All-American pig-head image that is so popular here in the civilised world. Well done.

[ QUOTE ]
we don't give a rats ass if you think ours is valid or not. Cheers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, and I imagine for one moment your belligerent opinions are actually representative? Now that is amusing. Your attitude clearly belongs firmly in the Donald Rumsfeld camp of arrogant dismissal. If that is the kind of person poker produces then I think that there is a need to make sure it stays out of your educational system, somehow the idea of a nation of Bush/Rumsfeld/Clarkmeister clones fills my head with images from "Dawn of the Dead" (or perhaps even "Shaun of the Dead" which is funnier but, you may not have that film over there).

When you grow up Clark, you will realise just how stupid your comments have been.

eh923
01-02-2005, 10:34 AM
Don't get your panties in a bunch. Sorry...that was Americanized. I mean, "don't get your knickers in a twist".

Zeno
01-02-2005, 02:39 PM
Do computers have translation software?

Are some of these software programs free to download?

I think that English should be declared the international language of poker - sort of like the 'English Only' rule during the play of hands at live poker in America and, one would assume, England; the fountainhead of civil behavior.

Aside from the international scientific community, which is still a somewhat fraudulent term, there is no 'international community'.

Rating or placing Clarkmeister alongside Bush and Rumsfeld is a rather quizzical way to express your opinions, of not only the mentioned triad, but of America itself. You labor under too many illusions and possibly delusions. You have little to no understanding of America. I have a book suggestion: For you Limeys (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0394703170/qid=1104690456/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/104-6826518-6329515)

So that you know who I am, and can pigeonhole me into your worldview, to the fullest extant possible for your apparent limited capacity to understand, I voted for George Bush and am profoundly proud of this fact.

-Zeno, An American.

naphand
01-02-2005, 04:55 PM
If anyone fails to understand it is you. The point of my post is not to slam the USA but to suggest the Article written by Al could have been better considered. Clarkmeister is the one who appears to take personal umbridge at my suggestion that a lot of readers will not understand the references. I am also not the only one to say so in this thread.

I am not surprised, although always disappointed, that any "questioning" of the way things are done in America is taken as an attack on the values of that country. What a paranoid place it must be. The fact that many "do not understand" America is itself an argument to use less specific references. Perhaps a better title for Al's article is "Can Poker help the USA Economy?", as I see little social comment or indeed any relevance to anyone outside the USA. This apart, Al does make some pertinent points, and gets quite a lot into what is a short article. It is otherwise well written.

Your "pride" in voting for the Monkey King is only to be expected from someone who makes no contribution to this thread of any kind, other than to question non-USA citizen's right to express their opinions when they run contrary to your "patriotic values". Fortunately, your "Patriot Act" only gags USA citizens. "Patriotism" is an ugly word, and especially when espoused by the Bush camp, who take it to mean the right to interfere in world politics, attack sovereign nations and bomb factories in far flung places around the world. The poker "community" is international, the term "international community" obviously refers to considering the whole planet as a single community, which is perhaps only reasonable given the nature of world trade. Or do you think that other lives are cheaper than American lives, oh yes, you do don't you "we don't do body counts...". I could go on about your Government and its indisputably illegal actions on the international stage, and it's poisonous and damaging effect on the international community (which you deny exists, much like the International Court of Jutsice, the UN, Human Rights etc.) but this is not the place to do that.

I agree that translation software could be used, and also do not have a problem if only English was used. But anyone reading Al's article who is not a USA citizen will feel cheated, or at least disappointed with it's insular content. For an article that appears to be some sort of social comment, it is misleading. As I say, perhaps a more thoughtful title would be better. If the article was clearly a comment about the USA, fine, it is the assumption that what applies to the USA applies to all that is at the heart of this, and many other issues.

I don't need to pigeonhole you, you and Clark seem to do a very good job of that yourselves. Fortunately I know some American citizens who are thoughtful and considerate, and have a different world view. This gives me hope.

Zeno
01-02-2005, 05:52 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I don't need to pigeonhole you, you and Clark seem to do a very good job of that yourselves. Fortunately I know some American citizens who are thoughtful and considerate, and have a different worldview. This gives me hope.

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this a worldview that fits snuggly with your own?

The purpose of my post was not to discuss Al's article. I was interested in the response that I would get from you. You did not disappoint. You also failed to see the relevance of the book suggestion. You have your own blinders; can't you even see that simple observation? Much of your post proves it (the ‘political’ part anyway).

By the way, I also own six different types of firearms. Does this help solidify in your mind the type of person I am?

-Zeno

Stork
01-02-2005, 11:41 PM
What can you do with six that you can't do with one?

Zeno
01-02-2005, 11:52 PM
If I had six wives would you ask the same question? /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Think about that for a minute or two. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

But we are way, way off topic now.

-Zeno

pudley4
01-03-2005, 01:40 AM
[ QUOTE ]
i'm sorry but this is an appallingly written article...
for a publisher with such a good reputation,i cannot believe twoplustwo published an arguement that starts with the sentence "Many people would say, "No," but they would be wrong. "
i can't fully engage with the arguements since i live in ireland and don't know much about the american education system,but in the irish education system a 15 year old would know that this is an unacceptable way of starting an arguement...
its gets worse-as mentioned,spurious economic generalisations are made,and no effort is made to back up arguements with evidence...
referring to someone quoted as an idiot is not a way to express any arguement unless you are writing for a tabloid newspaper...

someone said this is not meant to be a thesis in its defence:this point is a fallacy worthy of the article itself...
there are plenty of people who are quite capable of explaining a complex arguement succinctly in an article length piece without resorting to the sort of childishness displayed in this one,if mr schoonmaker is incapable of doing so that does not put him beyond criticism
in general i trust twoplustwo as a publisher because i assume that someone who knows more about the topic at hand than me has written something intelligently and that the publishers know enough to filter out this sort of rubbish...

other than that i enjoyed the rest of the magazine,hopefully the rest of the issues will cut out sub-polemic schoolboy arguements....

[/ QUOTE ]

blah blah blah

I look forward to reading your article, which I assume will be in an upcoming issue and be gramatically and logically perfect.

climber
01-03-2005, 04:12 AM
Before everyone got so very excited about what country they are or are not from, I also had a thought about the content of the article.

I too was dissapointed. I was attempting to descirbe the content of the article to my fiance the next day to reassure her of the innate goodness of me playing poker.

I remembered "ruthless meritocracy" and "american kids are losing their competitive edge because of liberals" Then i kind of blanked out and was left with a conclusion something like "We should teach kids to gamble so they will be more competitive later in life."

Maybe I too should go back to reread it. Anyways I also recall something about saying this article might be one of a few--or did I make that up with idle wishing?

naphand
01-03-2005, 05:52 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The purpose of my post was not to discuss Al's article.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well quite.

I expect you consider yourself to be a Christian as well? Maybe go read up on the Ten Commandments, you seem to have forgotten some of them. Then go look up the meaning of the word "hypocrite".

[ QUOTE ]



Is this a worldview that fits snuggly with your own?

[/ QUOTE ]

Why should it? If you have anything of value to contribute to this discussion than post. Otherwise keep your poisonous "patriotism/ignorance" away from these boards and discuss the points raised about the article, if you can.

naphand
01-03-2005, 06:05 AM
The answer of course is something like: "I have the right to carry arms and intend to exercise that right". The Charlton Heston argument. He believes he is "protecting himself" the truth is closer to "toys for the boys".

When one of his kids finds the guns, kills himself, his friend or the local schoolteacher he might understand the stupidity of what he does. Until then body counts and mall-shootings are only things that exist on CNN. The fact that Canada has similar gun laws, and a similar level of gun ownership, yet each year less people die from gunshot wounds in the entire country than in 1 New York day pretty much says everything about the troubled psyche of his nation.

Expect some sort of denial or attack on Canada, in response.

mmcd
01-03-2005, 09:11 AM
As a "minority" I have every right to ask that such articles be written in a style that reflects the international community, my request is entirely reasonable. I am also suprised that this is not SOP, as it must be apparent that there are a lot of non-USA readers.


lol

Zeno
01-03-2005, 10:05 AM
Well this has certainly gone on too far and is distracting from a discussion of Al's article. So I agree that I should stop posting. Thank you for all your interesting responses.

God Bless America.

-Zeno

adios
01-03-2005, 04:23 PM
Alan wrote:

[ QUOTE ]
It appears that I was not clear enough. I wrote: "we are losing the world's most important competition." I was referring ONLY to international trade. If we don't win that competition, it is literally impossible for us to preserve our international position and standard of living. You, I, and our economy as a whole must either earn more than we spend or pay severe consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

You replied with:

[ QUOTE ]
So, whenever anyone on the Forum or Magazine refers to "we" they are not referring to Canadians, Europeans or other members of the world commnity, they are refrring to the "USA".

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you conclude that this is necessarily the case? I wouldn't have a hard time imagaining that Alan would write something that contained "we poker players" which would include as you put it the "international community" of poker players and at the same time stating something like he did that pertains to U.S. citizens. People belong to more than one group. Methinks that your complaint probably isn't about how Alan used the word "we" but rather that Alan made a political statement that you didn't care for.

[ QUOTE ]
I thought the one of the big advantages of an internet magazine and forum, in line with poker rooms, is to create an international community?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how Alan comprimised this idea.

[ QUOTE ]
This article, while I accept that the larger portion of players and forum users are from the USA, is in a style, and uses examples, that refer to USA citizens only.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok he's guilty as charged.

[ QUOTE ]
Quoting american companies (who the hell are "Fidelity"?) and other American examples does not help, talking about the article in terms of what it can do for the USA economy does not help.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does not help what? Does not help make his point about competition?

[ QUOTE ]
I would suggest that if the USA wants to become competitive again, it needs to start recognising the existence and validity of the rest of the world (i.e. the countries that are not the USA) and communicate accordingly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Alan certainly recognized the existence and validity of the rest of the world wouldn't you agree?

[ QUOTE ]
The rest of the world is not "just like" the USA, just because they have a MacDonalds.

[/ QUOTE ]

Did Alan say that is was?

[ QUOTE ]
Articles in this magazine should go beyond national identities and boundaries, and I struggle to understand how this article was published with such a distorted viewpoint.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the distorted viewpoint you're referring to?

[ QUOTE ]
Has the situation in the USA really got that bad? that you feel it is not worth talking about issues outside the USA?

[/ QUOTE ]

From Alan's article and responses you make the conclusion that the situation in the USA is such that people in the USA feel it's not worth talking about issues outside the USA?

[ QUOTE ]
If I had penned an article making references to "Tony Benn" and the "Rover Plant outside Dagenham" would anyone outside the UK have a clue what I was talking about?

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't.

Honestly I'm not sure how to perceive your post. It seems like you may have an axe to grind about how narrow minded and provincial U.S. citizens are and are trying to fit Alan's article and posts into that viewpoint. If so, I don't think Alan's article fits all that well into that viewpoint (U.S. citizens being narrow minded and provincial).

Al Schoonmaker
01-03-2005, 10:14 PM
One theme that appears regularly in my posts and articles is that we should all understand and work within our own limitations. For example, if you look at my profile here, you'll see that I don't comment on how to play hands because other people can do it better.

I am an American, and I don't claim to know a great deal about other countries (although I have worked in 28 countries and have lived in yours). I was referring ONLY to America's competitiveness. I have no ability to "create an international community," nor am I trying to do so.

I'm just suggesting that poker has some social value because it teaches certain lessons.

One of my goals has been to stimulate discussion about a broader range of isses than are usually discussed. It seems that I've succeeded.

Thank you for your comments. Thanks also to the others who have commented.

Regards,

Al

GrannyMae
01-04-2005, 12:35 AM
you are like me. but smart.
that kind of pisses me off, but i have the smiley thing.

how come i never heard of you and you are a carpal? you must make poker posts or something to pad that count.

anyhoo, nice post.

i'm granny, nice to meet you.

http://smilies.sofrayt.com/%5E/_950/friendship.gif

naphand
01-04-2005, 05:29 AM
Yes, you did indeed succeed in stimulating discussion though perhaps not in the way intended. I liked your article because it took an interesting turn on a debate that has been rumbling in the background for some time, maybe not even the background for a lot of people... /images/graemlins/grin.gif

As I said previously, for a short article you got in a lot of thought-provoking points and overall set the tone for a good discussion. However, I do feel that perhap the title of your article should clearly identify this was an article about the USA, and not an article about social usefulness per se. One thing that bugs at lot of "continentals" (for want of a better word) is the notion that somehow what goes for the USA goes for everyone else. I often read news articles where people talk of, say the citizens of Iraq, as if they were fundamentally no different to citizens of the USA. They are, fundamentally (not in the religious sense) different in their view of life, their values etc. Sadly, Britain is not much better than this. Typically, and rather comically, the response of the British to "foreigners" (non-English speaking) has been to talk more slowly and more loudly, as if they were just stupid. No, they don't understand English... /images/graemlins/mad.gif

If you wish to write an article that speaks generally about social effects of poker, then it needs to avoid speciifc references, unless these highlight a particular point and their relevance can be easily determined. In this case it looks like it was your intention to write about poker in the USA, and this should have been made clear by a better choice of title and perhaps a clearer opening passage. Otherwise it just reads like "this is the USA, and that is all that is important". I do not know of the references you speak of, which would be considerably improved by a few words of explanation. I appreciate the limitations on the length of any article, and that you cannot please everyone, but whether people wish to deny the existence of an "international community" or not the fact is, it exists. Perhaps "international readership" is a better label for our purposes. I am sure the vast majority of readers, myself included, respect your input and your views on this and other psychological aspects of poker should be able to stimulate and entertain, even when we disagree. Without getting too PC about it, my work involves communicating to new citizens in the UK (migrant workers, new communities etc.) and I am very aware of how writing for what we may consider to be "our market" (in this case the majority readership, USA citizens) can appear to actively exclude people from the discussion, which can be both very divisive and demoralising. Far from this being an attack on American values, or a reflection of some kind of jealousy of the USA (which is just a denial-response from those who mistakenly believe that America represents everything that is good and desirable in the world and any criticism is an all-out attack on America) it was merely a reflection of what I felt a lot of your readership (the non-USA contingent) may see as a refusal to engage.

Titles and introductions are very important, if I penned an article entitled "Avoiding Tilt" and then talked for 1,000 words about the horrible bad beats I have taken over the last month, I would expect to be criticised, not just for moaning but for misleading the readership.

I know you won't take what I say personally Al, and look forward to more articles from you in future. I imagine you will have a piece for every month?

naphand
01-04-2005, 05:30 AM
Why would he bless America? While the world reels under the shock of an unprecedented (in recent history) natural disaster, your President is rapidly building a pile of corpses in the desert that may well exceed the death toll from the Tsunami, by the time you realise what a mess you have made and get out.

naphand
01-04-2005, 06:02 AM
Taking individual lines from a series of posts, then attempting to extrapolate meaning from them is isolation, is an exercise in futility. It is a clear indication that you wish to distort rather than discuss, and is frankly, shameful. It is also transparent and fake, nice work.

If you read my response to Al below you may understand the point I am making, which appears to be lost to the "defence of the USA" posters. This is not about attacking the USA, it is about how such articles may be percieved by non-USA citizens. You need to go beyond your pre-conceived ideas of how the rest of the world views the USA. It is understandable though, as you are only following the lead provided by your Government (and Tony Blair also has much to answer for) which continues to act in defiance of world opinion and is utterly dismissive of the need for any co-operation outside its own terms (the ultra-primitive "you are either with us or against us"). It is therefore no surprise that large chunks of your population will see this as an acceptable way to engage.

This has nothing to do with Alan making political statements, and I have never said so, nor do I beleive that was his intention. Nothing I have said indicates this, it is entirely a concoction of yours. Presumably this is another feeble attempt to discredit my argument, an argument it seems, you have yet to comprehend.

If you cannot see how an article that only talks about the USA, yet is entitled as a generic "social values" discussion, excludes non-USA citizens by its content, then perhaps you have no experience that helps you in this matter, in which case it is unlikely that anything I say will change your mind as you simply cannot comprehend the argument.

As for the rest of your "points" go, all of which were out of context and poorly considered: Alan did not make the point ("say") the world was the same as the USA but failing to acknowledge differences is the reverse side of the same coin, the MacDonalds reference was an attempt to draw a comparison, not an accusation, the distorted viewpoint was an interpretation based on the notion that "what is seen in the USA" must (by implication) apply elsewhere. I know this is how a lot of people see things, and not just in the USA, cultural integration is a huge problem globally and perhaps if you find this topic too hard to digest, you should speak to some the many international companies who employ "cultural integration consultants" specifically for the purpose of helping (i) migrant workers, and (ii) their sales team understand foreign markets and their competitors.

You don't know who Tony Benn is? /images/graemlins/shocked.gif. If I penned an article making such specific references to the UK economy and attempted to pass it off as applying equally to your economy do you seriously doubt I would not be criticised for it's "irrelevance" to the majority of the poker community reading these boards? There can be no doubt about it. Just because I represent a "minority" view, does not invalidate that view. Just as Al's article is not "invalid" because it is specific to the USA economy. My point is, the article was misleading as it at no point conveyed the notion that it was written for the USA economy only, nor did he use references that were easily applicable to citizens outside the USA. Are you getting there yet?

[ QUOTE ]
Honestly I'm not sure how to perceive your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is clear, yet is has not stopped you quoting me out of context and criticising points you clearly do not understand. You appear to have completely missed the main premise of the argument and, far from this being what you percieve as an Attack on Al or the USA, it is actually a request for more inclusive writing.

3/10 must try harder.

Zeno
01-04-2005, 09:13 AM
Naphand,

2+2, in its modest attempt to be all-inclusive, does have a politics forum. You would be most welcome to post your political viewpoints there. A much more appropriate place for such discussions.

-Zeno

Al Schoonmaker
01-04-2005, 09:32 AM
Thank you for all of your comments in this thread. I do not take them personally, and I agree that I have the common American tendency to focus too much on my own country.

I think you'll like the next one much more. It deals with a much more general lesson from poker: Don't oversimplify.

Alas, I must admit that I am often guilty of oversimplifying. Why? Because I'm human, and ALL humans make mistakes, including ones they fully understand.

I'm delighted to see you and others getting involved in this discussion, and I hope future discussions are this lively.

Respectfully,

Al

naphand
01-04-2005, 10:41 AM
[ QUOTE ]
The purpose of my post was not to discuss Al's article.

[/ QUOTE ]

Congratulations, you confirm that you are, indeed, a hypocrite.

Zeno
01-04-2005, 01:37 PM
It was not hypocritical to response to Your post and its contents, and not specifically to Al's. In addition, when it was obvious that things were getting too far afield I agreed to stop posting, and did so except to invite you to join the politics forum.

Again, I invite you to post in the politics forum, there are a lively group that post reguarly there that would enjoy your input.

-Zeno

jrz1972
01-04-2005, 01:38 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I wrote: "we are losing the world's most important competition." I was referring ONLY to international trade. If we don't win that competition, it is literally impossible for us to preserve our international position and standard of living.

[/ QUOTE ]

International trade is not a competition. See Ricardo, David.

adios
01-04-2005, 01:41 PM
[ QUOTE ]
Taking individual lines from a series of posts, then attempting to extrapolate meaning from them is isolation, is an exercise in futility. It is a clear indication that you wish to distort rather than discuss, and is frankly, shameful. It is also transparent and fake, nice work.

[/ QUOTE ]

Shameful? That's totally ridiculous and funny. You make a lot of statements in your post that are unsupported and/or unclear that you need to clear up. That's all I asked you to do as I took nothing out of context nor did I distort anything you stated. For instance you make statements like this:

As for the rest of your "points" go, all of which were out of context and poorly considered: Alan did not make the point ("say") the world was the same as the USA but failing to acknowledge differences is the reverse side of the same coin,

What does this have to do with the validity of the points Alan made about competition?

Show me one place where I actually did take something out of context. You haven't made a logical argument which apparently you won't do. Making false assertions lead one to any conclusion they want to make and your posts are full of conclusions. Asking you to clarify the assertions that your conclusions are made from is the only way I know of to see if one's argument actually holds together logically. I can see that you're not all interested in convincing anyone that your argument is logical. Also show me one place where I made a "defence of Americans" or where I actually attacked what you stated.

As to the rest of your "reply" to my post, you do more ranting and fail to respond to any points I made or any questions I asked. I'll just accept your post as a long troll and be done with it.

adios
01-04-2005, 01:50 PM
Nice to meet you Granny and thanks for the input /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

naphand
01-04-2005, 04:12 PM
Do you know what a hydra is?

[ QUOTE ]
Alan certainly recognized the existence and validity of the rest of the world wouldn't you agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

No he has not, you are still missing the core point. I can only assume that you have never worked with minorities, or people new to a country and have no concept of the kind of issues that they face. It is very easy to "exclude" people from conversations or debate, simply because they are not familiar enough with what you are talking about, this does not have to be deliberate. This article is exclusive by the very nature of its focus on issues specific to the USA (particularly its educational system). You would not understand an article penned by someone from the UK using such speicfic references, as you admit. If you cannot grasp this point then we are going nowhere. Picking bits and pieces from a long series of posts, it is not surprising that they might seem contradictory, this is what quoting out of contrext means. You do it in the very first part of your post, you pick a line from Als article, then pick one line from mine and try to make a case. You even try to convey the notion that I was "replying" to that one line (from the Article) with the quote you use. Frankly, that is underhand and you know it. The question is, what are you trying to say. I have re-emphasised that my core point is that the article is written ina style that is exclusive to debate by non-USA citizens. This is fair enough for an article that is written for that audience alone, but nowhere is this stated. As for the rest, I am sure you can find plenty to pick and jumble with. I have made my point, and Al has responded and I am sure will take to heart the points that everyone raises. I am satisfied with this, and have no reason to continue the debate endlessly, it is not +EV. If you do not understand my arguments, or refuse to accept my premise, fine. I doubt very much I have the ability or energy to try and convince everyone I am "right" (whatever that may mean). I made my point, I think it is a valid one. Arguments to the contrary from USA citizens saying that it is not the case are moot anyway, particularly in the light of what Al says himself.

adios
01-04-2005, 04:54 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Alan certainly recognized the existence and validity of the rest of the world wouldn't you agree?

[/ QUOTE ]

No he has not, you are still missing the core point.

[/ QUOTE ]

When Alan writes:

[ QUOTE ]
The trade deficit is caused by our buying more from foreign sources than we sell in foreign markets. It is many billions of dollars per month. We simply can't compete in many markets.

[/ QUOTE ]

He is most certainly recognizing the existence and validity of the rest of the world in their ability to compete favorably against the U.S. in markets. Other countries can build higher quality, cheaper products than the U.S. can.

[ QUOTE ]
I can only assume that you have never worked with minorities, or people new to a country and have no concept of the kind of issues that they face.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually you don't have assume anything but I digress.

[ QUOTE ]
It is very easy to "exclude" people from conversations or debate, simply because they are not familiar enough with what you are talking about, this does not have to be deliberate.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you're saying Alan's examples excluded a portion of his reading audience and I would surmise that that excluded portion will not grasp the points he's making. Ok I see where this could be the case.

[ QUOTE ]
This article is exclusive by the very nature of its focus on issues specific to the USA (particularly its educational system). You would not understand an article penned by someone from the UK using such speicfic references, as you admit. If you cannot grasp this point then we are going nowhere.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand your point now but I don't agree that Alan has "excluded" non USA readers.

[ QUOTE ]
Picking bits and pieces from a long series of posts, it is not surprising that they might seem contradictory, this is what quoting out of contrext means. You do it in the very first part of your post, you pick a line from Als article, then pick one line from mine and try to make a case.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're assuming that I'm trying to make a case. That's wrong I'm trying to understand that problems you had with Alan's article. Perhaps it's me but it wasn't clear to me in your post what you were driving at. I'm fairly certain I'm not the only one would encountered this.

[ QUOTE ]
You even try to convey the notion that I was "replying" to that one line (from the Article) with the quote you use.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I wasn't doing that. I simply pointed out where Alan used the word we and what I thought you were responding to.

[ QUOTE ]
Frankly, that is underhand and you know it.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I didn't do anything underhanded.

[ QUOTE ]
The question is, what are you trying to say.

[/ QUOTE ]

I found your post to be poorly written, making a lot of unsupported conclusions and wasn't quite sure the point you were trying to make. Like take this in my first reply to your post:

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought the one of the big advantages of an internet magazine and forum, in line with poker rooms, is to create an international community?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how Alan comprimised this idea.

[/ QUOTE ]

Basically you've explained how you felt Alan did comprimise that idea in my mind. Something you didn't do in your first reply to my post. Perhaps I should have asked you to explain how he comprimised that idea.


[ QUOTE ]
I have re-emphasised that my core point is that the article is written ina style that is exclusive to debate by non-USA citizens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok I get your point but I don't agree with you that Alan "excluded" non USA posters on this forum nor do I think you've made that case. All you've done is make the case that it is possible to exclude people. I don't think many would find that remarkable.

[ QUOTE ]
This is fair enough for an article that is written for that audience alone, but nowhere is this stated. As for the rest, I am sure you can find plenty to pick and jumble with. I have made my point, and Al has responded and I am sure will take to heart the points that everyone raises. I am satisfied with this, and have no reason to continue the debate endlessly, it is not +EV. If you do not understand my arguments, or refuse to accept my premise, fine. I doubt very much I have the ability or energy to try and convince everyone I am "right" (whatever that may mean). I made my point, I think it is a valid one. Arguments to the contrary from USA citizens saying that it is not the case are moot anyway, particularly in the light of what Al says himself.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ok.

ZeeBee
01-04-2005, 05:41 PM
I think "appalingly written" is an exaggeration - but my original point remains, the article fails to provide any real evidence to support the main point. It was kind of like an article suggesting that AJo should always be raised in early position without any solid reasoning or analysis of why this should be so.

This is a shame, because I normally find Alan's writing to be very good. Surely it couldn't have been too difficult to find some facts to support the position (or, as I suspect, to highlight that the position is somewhat weak). A cursory glance at OECD figures for example shows that the industrialised nations which have overtaken the US in productivity (GDP per hour worked) in recent years are Norway (131% of US productivity), Belgium (111%) the Netherlands (106%), Italy (105%), Ireland and France (103%) and Germany (101%). Japan is amongst the least productive at 72% of US productivity by the way. this could have been a good starting point for exploring differences in education systems and potential improvements to the US system. Instead, the US problems (many of which I'm sure are highly valid) were all lumped into the category of "anti-competitive bias" which serves more to obfuscate the issues than to clarify them. While the US education system may have a lot to learn from Norway, Belgium and the Netherlands, I don't think anyone who knows those systems would say that they put a stronger emphasis on competition than US schools.

By the way, I would like to point out that as a Brit, unlike naphand I didn't find the article to be insular and US-centric. Alan is an American and I find it quite natural for him to talk about the US economy and US companies when discussing competitiveness. I certainly didn't feel excluded and I doubt many others would have. I would suggest that for someone not to know who Peter Lynch, the Magellan fund and Fidelity are shows a rather more insular attitude than someone who writes about them assuming most people do.

ZB

Freudian
01-05-2005, 02:28 PM
One some level trade balance is of course tied to being competitive. But a lot of factors are of importance, just look what happened to the trade balance in the US after the drop in value of the dollar. You can hardly argue that the competitiveness on a microlevel has changed dramatically during this short time.

But I do think there are some basic mechanics where a wealthy people may lose competitiveness. At some sort of level they want to enjoy the wealth (which may lead to lower productivity), while those trying to catch up want to create wealth.

Nighthowl
01-16-2005, 10:53 PM
A trade deficit is not a sign of a losing economy. This is a misunderstanding possibly because of the word deficit. The US current account balance actually results from the incredible productivity of the U.S. economy. The American people vacuum the world of the good deals that other people beat each other up to offer.

That this sometimes results in the dislocation of U.S. workers is only an extension of the traditional course of development of the U.S. economy, sometimes called "creative destruction". But the benefits to the many far outweigh the costs to the few, which were usually inevitable anyway.

Japanse televisions wiped out the U.S. industry in the nineteen seventies, causing great difficulties for domestic workers, but producing a huge consumer profit for the millions of television buyers. A large part of the savings from such process (consider also, cars, watches, forklift trucks, and so on) is reinvested in the U.S. economy.

Likewise he U.S. dollars now in foreign hands is not a negative. It is actually pent up demand for U.S. goods, services, and investments. Those dollars inevitably come home. I have seen the U.S. run enormous current account deficits over the years. First the Swiss, then the Saudis, then the Japanse, now the Chinese -- and, always, the Canadians -- these bubbles have always been followed by huge booms in the U.S. economy as that money is reinvested, usually in capital accounts that increase U.S. productivity. Don't worry, buy stocks, especially capital equipment manufacturers.

Nighthowl
01-16-2005, 11:08 PM
Clarkmeister is right on both matters. After reading his responses to Naphand's insults -- C. was very congenial, considering -- I'd like to add a comment on the national debt.

When a debt is built by a government consuming the people's resources to buy popularity, as Johnson did in the sixties, the results are disastrous because it lowers the rate of capital formation (reducing profitability and productivity).

However, when deficits result from reducing the rate of government involvement in the economy, usually by cutting taxes, these deficits are in the way of investments, and if the citizens are allowed to participate freely in the economy, as they were after the Kennedy, Reagan, and Bush tax cuts, the results are very favourable for investors, workers, consumers, and international trading partners.

Deficits caused by tax cuts are socially useful. Insulting forum participants, calling them "Rumsfelds", and so on, is not.