Poker and Social Equailty

r3vbr · #1 03-13-2005, 03:08 PM

Is Poker a tool that is the exact opposite as a socialist government? While the objective of one is to equalize wealth, the object to the other is to concentrate as much as possible. Lots of people giving money to just a small group of people that are collecting from the masses of fish
(and this is especially the case for tournaments).

I read at another thread that there can't be a comunist poker player or he'll be a hypocrite, and I felt like posting

The Armchair · #2 03-13-2005, 03:30 PM

I think you're referring to my post. I said:
[ QUOTE ]
I am entirely sure that one cannot be a socialist poker player without being bad at one, if not both.

[/ QUOTE ]

wtfsvi · #3 03-13-2005, 03:36 PM

Yes, I've thought about this. I've toyed with the idea of comitting myself to poker and start playing for a living. I would feel like a hypocrite though, so I won't do it. (This could be solved by something like giving away what I don't need of my monthly winnings to someone who needs it more, while keeping a healthy bankroll ofcourse. But I don't really see that happening. Peoples definiton of "need" tend to change with their possibilities.)

(I'm not saying I'm a communist, but I probably agree more with the average communist than I do with the average american.)

EDIT: Oh, and you've got the task of a socialist/communist government kind of backwards. The goal is to make the government itself dissapear. Equality is the "tool", the government is the goal.

smoore · #4 03-13-2005, 04:02 PM

I think of poker as a small capitalist system so, yes, in my opinion it's diametrically opposed to socialism. It's like a little stock market going on in rooms all over the world, or more correctly it's a lot of different little markets as I may never play with anyone another single given player will.

Seven degrees of poker players, maybe? That would make it one big "market"

The once and future king · #5 03-13-2005, 05:18 PM

Poker is superior to both Capatalism and Socialism in that it is a pure meritocracy.

Cyrus · #6 03-13-2005, 10:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Is Poker a tool that is the exact opposite as a socialist government? I read at another thread that there can't be a communist poker player or he'll be a hypocrite.

[/ QUOTE ]

You will have to explain to me first how it is possible for "socialists" to succeed so decisively in a sport (a game) that is much more centered on individual (as opposed to communal) success, that is based on almost total annihilation of the opponent's psyche, that is not just a contest of wills, brains and personal strength but it also rewards the winner with everything and condemns the loser to hell.

I give you chess.

And await anyone's remarks.

HDPM · #7 03-14-2005, 12:06 AM

Any human who is a communist is a hypocrite.

fimbulwinter · #8 03-14-2005, 02:59 AM

[ QUOTE ]

I give you chess.

And await anyone's remarks.

[/ QUOTE ]

abysmal poverty and an immobile class structure brought on by a failed and flawed economic system explains this quite nicely

fim

fimbulwinter · #9 03-14-2005, 03:00 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Any human who is a communist is a hypocrite.

[/ QUOTE ]

finally someone who gets it

fim

InchoateHand · #10 03-14-2005, 03:04 AM

Poker keeps coming up as an analogy for the Market, Capitalism, etc. in these threads. Stop it. Poker is a horrible, horrible example---in the ideal poker world, with no rake, it is a zero sum game. Obviously that isn't the case, so poker is a net loss game. Lets hope the market isn't.

In theory, at least, the market should be expanding at a point where we do not need to segregate the world into the 5-7% of winners and the rest as losers.