Quote:
Originally Posted by MinusEV
I don't think religion (or lack of it) plays much of a part in it - Scandinavia (cue debate about how Finland is not part of it) have very good social security where you almost can't go truly broke the way you can in other countries.
You and your family is still guaranteed food, a home, health care, high level education etc almost no matter how broke you are, so the fear of going broke, or losing a big amount of money, is not going to be as high in these countries. It's by no means fun to be broke, you'll have to go without a lot of stuff and make sacrifices on many levels, but it's not as big a crisis as it can be elsewhere.
It can be argued that well developed social safety nets are linked to atheism. The idea of the individual's responsibility for his own fate - widely held in the US - is historically and philosophically connected to Christianity, i.e. every individual is responsible for his own salvation, and that events in the world are Gods Will. A more socialistic approach presupposes that an individual's fate is a result of the social structure, and that people are capable and responsible for creating a social structure with less inequality - as no god can be looked to to decide one's fate or ease human suffering. So in that sense; less belief in religion equals better social safety net.
But any socialist disposition is quite likely
not a factor in becoming a good poker player. Poker is an almost purely capitalist and competitive endeavor, and success in it is rather in spite of than because of a social-democratic society. A more realistic trait to look at is emotional reserve, but this again can be seen as linked to a pietistic religious tradition. . . But great scandi players like Ziigmund and Isildur aren't exactly posterkids for emotional control.
Maybe this could all be decided with a "Religious vs Atheist" Poker after dark show?