What good are we? As poker players, are we socially responsible?

What on earth makes you think that we owe anything to anyone just because we (fill in the blank). It could be golf or poker or skiing. Hopefully, you have developed enough character to do the right thing with your life. It sounds like you are at a crossroads and are looking for answers. Hopefully, you can take it upon yourself to live your life in a way that makes the world a better place. Giving money to causes that you believe in or giving your time to help people and causes that you believe in. If you have enough money and time to play poker and own a computer you probably have enough to buy "toys for tots" or dontae a turkey to the local food bank. It sounds like you have smoked too much weed and are contemplatinmg the vastness of the universe (ala the scene in "Animal House"). Lead a good life, be a good person, do unto others and try not to overthink everything. Don't sweat the details. Relax and don't take everything so seriously. Poker is a small distraction in a much bigger picture.

[SA125]

Asking "What good are poker players to society?" is well intended but barking up the wrong tree.

The virtuistic view of our job largely defining our contribution to society is simplistic BS. Becoming a doctor doesn't automatically make you any better for society in general than becoming a poker player. That's because, although the work they perform can be extrordinary and they deserve a tremendous amount of credit for it, it's only a part of who they are and what role they play in life. They could in fact be pedophiles or child molesters, like we've found some priests are. In that case they are low lifes who just happen to be good at an important job, but should otherwise possibly be condemned to death for their acts.

My perspective is based on this. I was a fireman. Great job that's well respected. Got paid average money for taking big risks. I've been married over 20 years and raised 2 kids. I look at the brain surgeon and the school janitor the same way. If both of those men do their job as it should be done, and both of them do right by their family, friends and others, then they both deserve the same respect as men. Of course the brain surgeon can impact someone's life in a much more positive way, but that doesn't mean he's any better than the hard working, family man janitor. Or poker player. You have to do more in life than just have a good job to earn your respect as a man.

Earn your own keep. Don't steal. Don't mess up other people's lives. Try to have a positive effect on them and help them when you can. Be responsible for the ones who depend on you. In general, just be part of the solution rather than the problem.

[BigF]

[ QUOTE ]
suntsu69 is right. Bulgaria is not a third world country. I guess it is more correct to label it as a developing one (which is a more broad category that includes some of the third world countries but excludes the ones with most underdeveloped economies). As much I hate to admit it, that is the truth. How else would you classify en economy in which the average monthly salary is about $200-250 (that is including the rural and not just the urban areas) and prices are converging to the EU averages? I won't go into GDP figures and other economic indicators, cause I don't know the latest numbers...

For those of you that do not know, which is understandable, Bulgaria is a small and beautiful Eastern European country with rich history and traditions. It has a booming tourist industry and its economy is definitely on the rise. The country is scheduled to join the EU in 2007... Take my word for it, I am voluntarily going back to live there after spending a few years in the States [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

PS suntsu69, pm me if you want to get in touch. By the way, did you call yourself after the author of The Art of War? Isn't his name spelled Sun Tzu with a z? [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] [haha, dai da ne se obijdame i narichame pederasi; prati mi chastno suobshtenie ako iskash. upseh s pokera]

[/ QUOTE ]

Skimpily clad hot chicks walk on streets everywhere you go?

Hahahahaha, "simply clad hot chicks" are literally everywhere. It is Eastern Europe after all!!! That along with booze, is our trademark [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] It is one of the main reasons why I am going back while I can still [do many things]....

[Rubeskies]

I'm not sure if anyone has said this yet, if there were no winning poker players and everyone broke even every year in poker, the Government would out of millions of dollars in taxes.

We pro gamblers who pay thousands in taxes of other people's already taxed money contribute tax money which is put to whatever use they see fit. Whether you agree with what they use with it or not, it still is "helping" society. I'm sure all of us could get other jobs, but many of us probably couldn't make as much money as we do and the ones with jobs suppliment their income well.

And playing poker might keep other jobs open for people who also get taxed and might not be making as much or be on wellfare if those jobs were not open.

Nightwish,

I don't have such a strong opinion on the topic to spend much time arguing. Still, I disagree with your logic so I will give it a final stab:

Did you you read my post? I admit that it was lengthy and did not provide good examples, but the ideas were still correct. In my post I was arguing why participating in financial markets or creating art or whatever other examples were given are NOT like playing poker and THAT IS WHY you cannot conclude that since any of those activites is not hurting society so poker is OK too

[ QUOTE ]
These examples in many ways are fairly close to poker. Once you realize how and why these are not "zero value" or "negative value" activities with respect to society, you should also be able to extrapolate the same for poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. I already said, those acitivities are NOT "zero or negative values" to society. Never claimed they were and even argued the opposite.

2. My point was that the similarities between those activites and poker are VERY,VERY small/negligible/insignificant... Yes, trading a stock is a transaction and so is playing a hand. But that is pretty much where the similarities end.
- What is the purpose of buying a stock? The owner of the stock receives more money than what he values that stock at the time of the transaction. The buyer of the stock gains equity ownership in a company which is at least as valuable to him as the money he gives away. In any case, DURING a financial transaction, a financial instrument is exchanged. In the example above, at the time of the transaction, the buyer of the stock is better off, the seller of the stock, and either directly or indirectly the company whose stock is bought/sold is also better off. [Of course, the transaction might take place so that one or both sides instead of maximizing profit tries to minimize loss. Logic is the same...]. You also mentioned that the stock market fluctuates and that creates risk/uncertainty, which is also similar to poker. Very superficial similarity: the stock market fluctuates based on how companies are valued, not according to some random generating mechanism like in poker. In other words, if you buy a stock and lose money it is because the value of the company in which you are a shareholder has decreased, not because somebody randomly tossed a coin and you lost....
What is the purpose of playing a hand of poker? As I said in my original post, it seems to be for money to exchange hands. In any case, as I said before, the main reason why playing a hand is different from all the examples above, is that IN POKER NO GOOD OR SERVICE IS TRADED. SOME MONEY SIMPLY EXCHANGES HANDS according to how well the parties involved are able to predict and react to a random event (cards being dealt).

3. So to sum up, because of the reasons I mentioned above and possibly because of others:
- Poker is NOT like trading a stock, it is NOT like creating music and offering it to the public, it is NOT like any of the examples given.
- We already agreed that that the examples above are not necessarily harmful to society, so what does that tell us about poker which is NOT like any of them? Nothing.

That is why I don't agree with your quote from above.

In any case, thanks for the discussion. It helped me clarify things for myself. I guess I just discovered the hard way some of the reasons why poker is illigal in certain domains. [Yes, there are arguments for legalizing online poker but they are the same as the arguments for legalizing drugs. I mean, if drugs are legalized it would not be because they have a positive impact on the average person and similarly, if poker is legalized it would not be because it has positive impact on the average person.]

Again, did not try to preach against gambling. I will probably continue playing and I guess, as suggested, I will have to try to make up for it in some other way :-)

Bate

[UATrewqaz]

Poker players are like leeches. We contribute nothing and soak up the wealth created by people who are actually productive.

But casinos are leeches too and do the same thing. We are basically getting a chunk of what the casions would get eventually (aka idiots will throw away money on the lottery, slots, etc.)

Edit after reading some responses:

Great point, what obligation do we have to be productive to society? A winnign poker player is productive for himself. Why is a person under some obligation to benefit the "world" as a whole? A poker player is not a drain on society (like a bum on welfare) due to the fact the poker player is actually doing something to earn his money (outplaying stupid people voluntarily putting their money on the line, you don't voluntarily pay taxes for welfare)

I'd have to say I find the arguments that poker and/or day-trading are somehow "useful" very very thin. I don't think any of those are useful. My point is I don't think slaving away for 30 years at IBM is any more useful.

Oh yeah, and since I found poker, I no longer indirectly support the Columbian cartels. [img]/images/graemlins/shocked.gif[/img] So that's somewhat useful right?

[ QUOTE ]
. Becoming a doctor doesn't automatically make you any better for society in general than becoming a poker player.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK. Take away all the doctors in the world.

Now take away all the Poker players in the world.

Which has the biggest effect on society?

Surely that example goes a long way to demonstrating "value to society"?

Ian

[SA125]

[ QUOTE ]
OK. Take away all the doctors in the world.

Now take away all the Poker players in the world.

Which has the biggest effect on society?

Surely that example goes a long way to demonstrating "value to society"?

[/ QUOTE ]

Take away all the good people in society. Leave all the bad ones. How good will things now be? Surely you see that point.

The value of doctors is indisputable. Good people in general, in the masses, is needed just as much. Why focus on just poker players and suggest their contribution to that is less valuable?
Someone going to a cardroom everyday, tipping the dealers and waitresses, being friendly, polite and courteous to the patrons and employees, may not be curing their ills, but it'll always have a positive effect in making their average everyday a better one. Why isn't that valuable?