All right, I'll de-lurk and say something about this.

The older I get, the less I care about "stuff". Making things -- televisions, jewelry, furniture, cars, whatever -- uses energy and resources. It's actually bad for the world to make too much stuff. Especially cheap stuff like you find at Walmart, that lasts a few months and then hits the landfill.

So I don't believe that making stuff, beyond the necessities of food, shelter, a bit of clothing per person, is a societal good.

It takes a very small portion of our population to fulfill our real needs. Maybe one-fifth of all the people working in the US create something necessary to life. It takes only 2% of our population to feed us, for example. Plus another few percent to build homes and provide health care. Maybe add in utilities and emergency services. Teachers. What do we really need?

So that leaves at least half our workers doing something unnecessary.

What would happen if all the unnecessary work stopped? Loads of previously employed people would be bored out of their skulls. They'd start roaming the streets and rioting, or searching for new games

Don't underestimate the value of giving people something interesting to do. Setting up after school programs to play basketball lowers truancy and street crime. Letting people be bored is a societal evil.

And I want experience. Far more than I want some new thing. I want a chance to test myself, and learn. I want to compete, and stretch myself in ways that nothing but the competition of other people can provide. I want the thrill of action -- and it is more thrilling when I have something on the line. If I couldn't risk my money, would I have to risk my body? Say, by taking up boxing?

In the terms of economics, anything someone voluntarily gives money for is a good. I'm willing to pay for it. You and all your opponents are willing to pay for poker. So it is a good.

But if you are looking for a more meaningful definition of good -- consider that entertainment is worth a lot more than you are giving it credit for. The Romans found they needed to provide bread <font color="red">and circuses</font> to keep peace in the streets. Currently, we've noticed that "Man will always use his most advanced technology to amuse himself". There must be something truly important about amusing ourselves, if we will go to that much trouble to do it. After all, if you were healthy and sheltered and clothed and fed and didn't enjoy any of it -- what would be the point?

And it's often while amusing ourselves that we make our greatest discoveries. Poker has inspired deep insights into the math of random outcomes. It has helped many people know themselves better, and become more able people. It maintains mental fitness, even among the elderly.

And remember, the Communist experiment failed. It does not work to try to provide good to all without the motivation of gaining good for yourself. So maybe we need the training in competition and selfishness.

There are very deep things about being human that emerge and gain play through our games. Likely more than we can reach through analysis on a forum. I was asking the questions you're asking a couple years ago. I like the earlier points that it's your experience and gained wisdom that you take with you, and also that living your passion is extremely valuable. I'd also like to observe that games generally take a human ability to the edge -- they are like muscle isolation exercises for the mind. Very useful.

Thank you for opening the topic. I've enjoyed hearing the responses.

Ok, re-lurking.