Argggh that reallly is a sad story . I have one too from live poker I’ll post when I cbf

I have a question for you.

Do you think there is any benefit derived from government?

Of course your answer has to be yes. It is literally the difference between the U.S.A. and Somolia.

I prefer living under a government providing a somewhat peaceful environment for me to thrive. Especially under a democratic government where the power is with the people to elect a government that they will do best. That said, a democracy requires a well informed populace. An ill-informed populace can be taken advantage of and be fooled to vote against their own best interests.

Oddly enough, it has been my experience that those who are most anti-government are also those who fall in the ill-informed portion of the populace.

So do you think you derive any benefit from a government or is Somalia a utopia for you?

Yeah it’s comical all those takes

Me playing poker professionally isn’t immoral ! Because ;

-Government is bad!
-Capitalism is bad!
-Society is bad!

I wonder if poker opportunities even exist without those things

Or even the smartphone you are using to post your self serving opinions lol

Of course, we need some government. The question is how much, and once we go over that point we are just getting raked over the coals in taxes.

You need some government to provide security (guaranteeing private property, and that you can study, work, research, be an entrepreneur, and whatever legal activity you want to do without inefficiencies like having to constantly worry about your life, your family's, your property safety etc). You don't need a government trying to direct and influence the economy, or invasive governments wanting to take care of peoples lives telling them how they should behave inside their own homes, how their houses should be, their diets, or even telling them how they should think and not think. Anything in-between is up for discussion IMVHO.

providing security for the things you mentioned is inherently influencing the economy.

the covid pandemic comes to mind, if it was a worse disease, then by your logic the government A. has a responsibility to protect citizens B. shouldn't interfere in our behavior/economy, but the two are mutually exclusive, to provide security is by definition a restriction on freedoms

I am almost sure we come from different countries and different paradigms, so what I mean by government influencing economy is not necessarily what you think. Think a government deciding industries it wants to incentivize, via subsidies for example, and other industries it doesn´t want to do very well. State capitalism. And then obviously you may increase this intervention more and more til you have a Soviet Union type communist economy with five year plans. I agree with your covid argument btw, and it's a great reminder of how hard it is to draw clear lines.

America is a consumer based economy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There is no need for the government to protect its citizens from themselves. People could have stayed home and not gotten covid, the government didn't need to force other people to stay home if they were fine with the risk.

If someone has a problem, I don't think we should be in the business of dissuading them from GA.

OP is correct about the efficacy rates, but what about the acute impacts? There's also studies that show 60% of new GA attendees reduce their gambling spending in the short term. Is that not a win for the problem gambler? I am not qualified to talk about harm reduction vs. abstinence. Both seem to have merits IMO.

It's whatever works for the person managing the problem, at the end of the day.

I don't think any politicians are going to take you seriously if you are not at least putting GA in the discussion.

I've never been to a GA meeting in my life, but if someone goes once and it's not for them, I think that's a big positive step in at least acknowledging that there is a risk of this getting out of control.

If this is a disease, couldn't it exist on a spectrum? Wouldn't you want to catch any other disease early in it's progression?

Society looks down on that sort of thing when it comes to addiction, but they shouldn't & wouldn't if we were talking about cancer.

Creating barriers and boundaries is what prevents some people from triggering these obsessive compulsive emotions. In 2024, all the traditional boundaries have been taken down.

The other thing that should be noted is that many problem gamblers should see if their HSA/FSA funds through an employer would cover meeting with a professional to get an individual treatment plan that helps get them in the right direction.

I have nothing but love for OP and OP's journey. I respect it, I just think there's more than one path to the top of the mountain.

Interestingly enough, I know a few people who did switch to tournaments for ethical reasons. This is also the advice many of my poker playing friends have given me. Of course I've thought about doing it, but I can't, mainly be cause I don't play NL (or any big bet variant). More accurate to say, I dont play big bet poker WELL. Idk what it is about it, but at best I probably break even in the average 2/5 game, and am likely -EV in most 5/10. Know any fixed limit tournaments outside of major tournaments series,?

Also, I have a family to support, which requires a relatively consistent income. I can't have losing years, so tourneys are a no go. Winning the main event would be pretty cool though!

I've already tried to explore other ways to play poker that are more ethical, and they just don't work. My overall outlook, and perhaps my intent posting this, is more about coming to terms with the shitty things I have to do then trying to find a way around them.

After reading this post, reflecting, and playing a few sessions with a wide spectrum of people at low stakes. (ex. disabled persons, veterans, retirees, unemployed, all of which you can find in any poker room, sometimes at the same table).

I believe for every working "problem gambler" as they have been labeled in this thread, there is probably a person directly beside them who is utilizing tax payer money (directly or indirectly) doing the same. I see no problem with how someone who is disabled/served/retired spends their time or money. When it comes to those that are paid by the government or tax dollars specifically, if they are donking around and giving money away, I guess its just rake back, I don't feel bad *shrug*. (I'm just a dude with a job who plays recreationally).

Most people on a government check can only afford lower stakes, So I don't have to deal with much of that. I totally get what you mean about take back, and it's really a mind**** if you pay taxes off poker winnings. Like an endless money loop.

I assume high stakes player don't see too many problem gamblers either, and those they do are likely wealthy and can afford to lose I. The games. I play midstakes which is the worst of all the worlds. My regular game is filled with people who can't afford to play it. I do t mean a young grinder taking a shot, I mean a degen who's gonna almost always lose.

You are still missing the point.

It is still in the government and the people's interest to incentivize certain industries. One reason might be because of national security. Computer chips are of utmost importance to any economy in the world, but if all of those computer chips are made in China then then everyone's economy and national security is at the mercy of China.

A second reason is a concept called Tragedy of the Commons. It is a situation where if everyone acts in their own self interest, it leads to disaster for everyone. If one person in a city of thousands poured their used motor oil down the sewer, it wouldn't matter. But if everyone does it (especially places like oil change shops) then it overwhelmes the water processing plants and everyone's water gets contaminated.

Government is obviously needed in situations like that. People are not going to regulate themselves because they will act in their own best interest and use the cheapest method of disposal (pouring into the city sewer).

The third reason is most individuals do not have the capacity or resources to defend themselves in most situations. Look at the Emerald Ash borer. It is a species that is not native to North America. It comes from China and it just devastates Ash trees.

They came to North America in wooden pallets made of Chinese Ash. People would import a pallet of Chinese made crap, the pallet would make it to America, the crap would be opened from its packaging and the pallet would be discarded. The Beatles would thrn migrate from the discarded pallet to nearby Ash trees and devastate them.

No individual would have enough resources to figure this out, let alone prevent it. Only something like the Federal government can do that.

To your point, yes, it is silly and dumb for a central government to tell industry to produce X number of gym shoes or Y number of loaves of bread. That is the Soviet Union model you worry about. No doubt.

However, that is not what is happening here. Most government regulations address one of the three exceptions I mention.

Don't let poor sources of information take advantage of you by misrepresenting what government interference is doing.

Are you OK with your next door neighbor storing 10,000 pound of TnT in their garage? How about if he dabbles in building a small modular nuclear reactor?

What if he decides to open up a shooting range in his backyard with your shared fence as the background?

What you fail to realize is that it isn't the government saving citizens from themselves. It is the government protecting citizens from the bad decisions of others.

Umm, no. But I fail to see what that has to do with forcing businesses to close and people to stay home because otherwise they might get Covid. Covid could not affect me unless I made the personal decision to leave my home, and that decision could not affect anyone else who didn't leave their homes, voluntarily taking that risk.

This is not the thread/forum to discuss government response to Covid. Any subsequent posts along those lines will be deleted.

In fact, any posts about government don't really belong in this thread.

This hijacked thread sucks.

I am sorry you missed the point.

There’s a lot of ethical considerations in poker.

So many that I think I could right a novel on the topic.

Given my username I had to chime in:

I don’t think you can worry about other people’s choices and you have to let them have their free will.

You need to view your poker time as if you were a business owner. You are in competition for money. Your concern is for your businesses profit. PERIOD. Playing poker for profit is capitalism at its finest. Does Apple care the customer needs to buy diapers but is getting a new iPhone? NO, they are a business and profit is what matters.

You either need to think like a businessman or change jobs.

Didn't Daniel Negraenu say years ago in interviews that part of the job of a pro player is providing, or least trying to engage in a way that creates, an entertaining experience for the other players who sit down to play?

Probably, he certainly seems to do that based on his televised appearances.

he also said "more rake is better" so you dont have to take him at his word

Nope. It isn't capitalism until you start buying pieces of other players.