Is being pro ethically wrong? Of couse not you communist!

[McBluffin]

Hello,

Let me introduce myself. I've been a professional online poker player for about a year now. I have chosen this way of life because I love it and the money has been ridiculous. However, I've always considered myself a bit of a philosopher and a ladies man. Apparently, I’m also a liar (see previous sentence). So now I'd like to write about an issue that has been troubling me. So, here it goes.

Is it ethically wrong to play poker for a living or even for a profit? My natural reaction is to scream NO! and bitch-slap the nearest person to my right. However, after contemplating the issue I think I have a better way to present my case.

First let’s start out with why it might be wrong. You (For the rest of this paragraph when I say “You”, I’m assuming “You” are a winning player) are sitting down with inferior poker players and taking their money with your superior skill. Taking money from someone is harming them and therefore could be wrong. You are causing everyone at the table to win less or lose more. You are just as evil as the casino. You are occasionally playing against addicts that can not help themselves. You are contributing to the destruction of that addict’s miserable life.

Feeling defensive yet? Now I will attempt to answer this question and also prove that if you disagree with me, then you must be a communist scumbag. Now I could go into how we are all supposed to be competent adults and all have a fair chance because we are all put under the same conditions. However, I think it’s a lot easier to understand if you think about poker players as their own little business.

Going with this business concept, let me pose a little “real world” situation. Let’s assume that you open a flower shop in a small town where there is only one other flower shop that is run by a little old lady. It doesn’t really matter what the business is, it could be hardware, software, or even sex toys. Hmmm… I like that idea! Ok, I’m changing the shop to be sex toys. Now is just so happens that you are damn good at selling sex toys. You are so good that you run the little old lady out of business. It’s not your fault that she’s better at using her toys then selling them. It’s just the nature of CAPITALISM! (I used all caps, get it!) So, if you think that running her out of business is wrong, then you must believe capitalism is wrong. So I will therefore assume you are a communist. This really makes a lot of sense when you think about it. Corporations all around the world are just as ruthless as a poker player can be.

There is still one more aspect of this that I would like to talk about. The addicts. They seriously can not stop themselves. They are often in a state of desperation and you are fleecing them. Doesn’t that sound wrong? Well, even if you’re not a communist it might make you feel a little guilty. Kinda like that time you farted in class and blamed it on the fat kid.
It might make you feel bad to take an addicts money, but quite frankly, it’s just not your fault that they have a problem. It’s also not your responsibility to stop them from hurting themselves. In reality, you couldn’t stop them even if you tried. The only thing that is going to stop them is hitting rock bottom. So you’re arguably doing them a favor by speeding up the process. Going back to the business concept, keep in mind that restaurants/bars will give alcohol to alcoholics and nobody blames them.
In conclusion, if someone tells you that what you’re doing is not fair or even wrong, call them a communist and bitch-slap them, they deserve it!

[Wake up CALL]

I would have chosen this choice:

No, and I'm amazed someone so stupid is literate.

Except you wrote several hundred words in a single paragraph with comingled thoughts,so scratch off the literate portion.

[lefty rosen]

Is being a pro an different than being a bar owner? How many lushes do you have to serve everyday knowing that they are sick addicts? But yeah I see some of the craziest chases and calls that are beyond even stupid play/ weak play. So you know the grey matter of your opponents brain is fried..........

[McBluffin]

[ QUOTE ]
I would have chosen this choice:

No, and I'm amazed someone so stupid is literate.

Except you wrote several hundred words in a single paragraph with comingled thoughts,so scratch off the literate portion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Communist. Oh and by the way, if your going to insult my literacy I suggest you spell commingled with to m's.

[fnurt]

The point is more that a professional poker player, unlike someone who manufactures goods or provides a service, adds nothing to society. The only thing you provide is an opponent for people who want to play poker, and the fact is, they would be just as happy (probably happier) to play against unskilled opponents rather than you. The only person providing a needed service in this context is the one operating the card room.

I have nothing against professional poker players by the way, I offer this point only for its intellectual value! I do think it has relevance in the context of whether gambling income should be taxed by the government, as I think it would make little sense to tax productive activities while giving gambling a special status, but that is a separate issue.

[McBluffin]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is more that a professional poker player, unlike someone who manufactures goods or provides a service, adds nothing to society.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually considered writing about not adding any value to society in my orginal rant, but didn't due to length/laziness. However, I do think that I add value to society. How so? Maybe not as obvious as a doctor, but I generate a lot of money for a lot of people in society. The card rooms/sites make almost $2000 a month in rake off me. I spend alot of my profits on all sorts of goods and services. I'm helping the economy. Many people in society value this. Although I will concede that I do not add as much value as a doctor. But I don't really care about not adding value to society. Not adding value isn't wrong. Would you consider someone who is poor and unemployed to be doing something ethically wrong?

I hope this doesn't come across as me attacking you.

[El Dukie]

I'm picking "no," but primarily because I don't agree with calling anyone who disagrees with you a Godless Commie. And I just feel like being a contrarian.

The truth is that if we don't play poker, we're letting the terrorists win!

[Terry Funk]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would have chosen this choice:

No, and I'm amazed someone so stupid is literate.

Except you wrote several hundred words in a single paragraph with comingled thoughts,so scratch off the literate portion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Communist. Oh and by the way, if your going to insult my literacy I suggest you spell commingled with to m's.

[/ QUOTE ]


It's funny "Wake Up Call" nitpicks grammar and he can't even get his own spelling straight.

And Wake Up Call is a stupid commie. His ignorance and belligerence on these boards are more humorous than anything.

[balkii]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would have chosen this choice:

No, and I'm amazed someone so stupid is literate.

Except you wrote several hundred words in a single paragraph with comingled thoughts,so scratch off the literate portion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Communist. Oh and by the way, if your going to insult my literacy I suggest you spell commingled with to m's.

[/ QUOTE ]

And uh... by the way, if your going to insult HIS literacy I suggest you spell 'two' with a W between the 'T' and the 'O.'

[McBluffin]

[ QUOTE ]
And uh... by the way, if your going to insult HIS literacy I suggest you spell 'two' with a W between the 'T' and the 'O.'

[/ QUOTE ]

hehe, opps.