On people who play poker for a living

[Dominic]

[ QUOTE ]
What does anyone in the entertainment industry contribute to society, usually not much unless their piece of work makes us more socially consicious about an important issue (few and far between). Poker players are similar to entertainers in that some people enjoy putting thousands of dollars in poker tournaments even though they know that chances are overwhelming that they dont see the money again. Mostly they enjoy the thrill that comes with playing poker, like others enjoy video games or movies. So in that respect, poker players are just as much a drain on society as movie actors and directors, authors, video games designers, or some Vegas stage act, none of them are providing anything to society except entertainment. Plus poker players pay taxes just like everyone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is an asinine position.

Do you really believe people who make movies, or write thrillers, or create video games contribute nothing to society???

The people who entertain you - scare you, make you laugh, pull you into their story or game, play a professional sport - they are hugely important to society. Without them, all you would have is your job, telling your family and friends that you love them in between the times you work and sleep, and masturbation.

Everything else you do or enjoy comes directly from the entertainment industry. Your life would be joyless without it.

You need to reconsider your opinion.

[drewjustdrew]

[ QUOTE ]
i concur that was a nice convincing reply.

To draw a parrallel to the original poster should every bar that serves alcohol be shut down....after all, all they do is charge money to provide booze and a place to socialize for the boozers. And since some people cant control their alcoho intake and are alcoholics, why should everyone else have to give it up?

Its the same thing, a small percentage of problem gamblers, while sad for them, is not reason to crucify everyone else for it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think the OP had a problem with the casino...just the "non-recreational' players. So his issue would be with the professional drinkers, but not the occasional social drinker.

[MMMMMM]

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Gamblor]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
the question is how to reconcile this interest with my values. to that end, i posted here hoping that other people have gone through the same issues.

[/ QUOTE ]

That by far is the funniest thing I've read on 2+2. I'd love to learn more about the value system of someone who likes to identify himself in a public forum with the activity of "bangin bitches." I guess respect for women is not in the value system, but giving back to society is. What kind of "giving back" one asks? .... Giving "bitches" a good "bang" of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're a big nerd.

[Jedster]

[ QUOTE ]
And many people who lost at poker (such as myself at times0 justify it as spending money for entertainment. To do anything entertaining requires paying a fee, poker players provided the opportunity to play poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually the casinos provide the opportunity to play poker. Sure, the games at some smaller joints wouldn't exist without regulars, but the games online and the games at places like Bellagio/Mirage/Wynn don't really require "pros" to exist. In fact, I think people would probably have more fun without pros at the table. In short, you're not doing them a favor by playing, and they certainly don't owe you any money. (The only exception being the really huge games where rich guys like Andy Beal might want to take a shot.)

That said, I wouldn't really think to hard about this question. If you like what you do, and you're making money, keep on doing it. The biggest reason why you shouldn't feel bad about taking their money is that they don't feel bad during the 30-40% of the time when they take your money.

May their pots be small and your pots be monsters.

-Jed

[kutuz_off]

Poker players' benefit to the society is in increasing the utility of money. The money exchanged at the poker tables generally means less to the losers (who must, by definition, be able to afford to lose that money long-term) than to the winners.

The two exceptions to that rule are the degenerate gamblers who lose their high-utility money, and the rich winners to whom their winnings are of relatively lower utility. The former will lose their shirt whether or not you help them do it, so there's not reason to lose your sleep over those. The latter..I've got nothing there.

[Durs522]

[ QUOTE ]

Everything else you do or enjoy comes directly from the entertainment industry. Your life would be joyless without it.

You need to reconsider your opinion.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're saying that your life would be joyless without the existence of the entertainment industry? I'm not sure about you, but I could turn off TV, video games, radio, etc. and still have an enormous amount of joy in my life. I think you may need to reconsider your opinion.

[flyingmoose]

[ QUOTE ]
Poker players' benefit to the society is in increasing the utility of money. The money exchanged at the poker tables generally means less to the losers (who must, by definition, be able to afford to lose that money long-term) than to the winners.



[/ QUOTE ]

I've read this entire thread and this is the only argument that has me even moderately convinced that playing poker contributes anything to society.

I still think that the opportunity cost of a poker player's (usually bright) mind is not a loss to society. Many poker players would make great doctors, engineers, teachers, etc.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one who sees validity to what the OP is saying?

Economic models are based on the assumption that all participants in the economy are rational. Countless psychological studies prove that losing gamblers are not rational. Essentially, we're getting money without providing a service to anyone.

I'm trying to think of a profession that provides less to society than poker, and I can't.

Of course, that doesn't mean poker players are bad people in other aspects of their lives -- and anyone who took the OPs post to mean that needs to grow some skin.

[/ QUOTE ]

People tend to believe what makes them comfortable.

Some people DO have jobs where they make a contribution, though it's also true those jobs tend not to be among the most highly paid.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]

Every person who works and makes money recycles it back into the economey, and that in turn helps others.

Poker winners win money and spend it on goods/services which gives other people work and helps them feed their family



[/ QUOTE ]

The difference between poker players and people who work for a living is that the latter produce something.

Poker players don't produce anything.

If you make a song, and sell it on the open market, the person who pays for it makes a conscious decision that he'd rather have your song than the money he parted with.

It's a win-win situation.

If your CD wasn't worth at least ten dollars to him, he wouldn't have bought it. He's gained, because he'd rather have your songs than his money, and you've gained, because you'd rather have his money than the CD you sold him.

In a poker game, the loser doesn't gain anything when he loses his money.

It's purely a transfer of money. The loser isn't any better off than he was before. In fact, he's worse off by exactly the amount the winner won. Poker is a zero-sum game. There's no multiplier.

Losing your money is not entertaining.

If you think people play poker for entertainment, consider this - when you go to see "Star Wars," you part with your money up front.

How many poker players would pay you - the supposedly winning poker player - if they had to pay you for your time up front?

People are entertained by winning, and they play for the chance to win. If anybody is providing "entertainment" at the table, it's the losers, not the winners.