Re: Good Post
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hard to say they contribute to society from an industry driven by greed. Im referring to those who play for a living, not players who play for entertainment. Almost like society slugs [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]. Poker needs more people like Barry Greenstein. Not saying they should give their winnings to charity, but if you are winning hundreds of thousands a year you can easily do some good.
Just my 2cents

[/ QUOTE ]

I think Barry Greenstein is just as greedy as anyone else despite his much publicized charitable contributions. I know he's the hero of the moment on 2+2 right now, but if you listen to a lot of what he says you can see the reason he plays poker is for money.

Once he got so much that he was living next to movie stars, then he started making donations. That's fine. It's great that he does that. But if you've got 20 million in the bank and a house that's worth 10mill (or whatever- I don't know the numbers), a few hundred K here and there (incidentally, for exact numbers go to his website) is not going to break you. It's not like the guy is starving to death and living in a commune sacrificing his material well-being in order to help others. In fact, and I know this will get me flamed, but I think someone who publicizes the amount of money he gives to charity might be doing it for more complex reasons than simply "being a great guy".

Call me cynical (or an a-hole if you prefer) but I am a little suspicious of this whole robinhood thing.

Re: On people who play poker for a living
 

tell me you really don't understand the difference in contribution between the guy who made the computer you used to type out your post and the guy (i.e. me) who sits at a table all day waiting for people to pass him their money.

I mean, to each his own, right? but even then, some "owns" are worth more than others in the grand scheme of things.

I'm entitled to wrestle with these thoughts as a new professional gambler.

Re: On people who play poker for a living
 

[ QUOTE ]
tell me you really don't understand the difference in contribution between the guy who made the computer you used to type out your post and the guy (i.e. me) who sits at a table all day waiting for people to pass him their money.

I mean, to each his own, right? but even then, some "owns" are worth more than others in the grand scheme of things.

I'm entitled to wrestle with these thoughts as a new professional gambler.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wrestled with them at first too, and I enjoy discussing them. I'm certainly not criticizing you for raising the question or for having a far different world view than me.

That said, I'm not going to lie to myself about who I am or what my role truly is. I'm not interested in saving the world. It can't be saved, and I don't have the time. None of us do.

To me, the guy that invented the computer, though he has affected my relatively insignificant life in a positive way by allowing me to make a living easier, has actually done virtually nothing in the grand scheme of things. He has made some animals' lives more convenient. That's the extent of it. Is that even really a good thing? Even that could be debated until the end of time.

While I will grant you that there is certainly a difference to me, right here and right now in my little 27 year life span, between my doctor and my blackjack dealer, to paraphrase Fight Club, "on a long enough time line everyone's lifespan is equal to zero".

Essentially what you're saying is that you and I are less valuable to society than someone who works the counter at 7-11. What I am saying is that, if that is so, then to hell with society. I don't need it, and neither do you. I don't think that my value as a human being should be detrermined by whether or not I facilitate the convenience of others.

Of course, if you want to feel like you are contributing to society, I could come up with quite a few justifications for what we do and its value to "the people".