What does poker contribute to society? To my mind it's really a pointless question. Unless, of course, one is willing and honest enough to ask that question about myriad other occupations. Take for example elder care. Does the senior living care industry contribute to society when they suck the elderly dry like Dracula seducing a virgin and then send said elder to a state home? What about the prosecutor who lies through his teeth to get a conviction on sketchy evidence? The priest who has child issues? The burned out journalist, lawyer, cop, doctor. . .etc. Look hard enough and just about every human endeavor ends in a dead end. Why should poker be any different? For myself I enjoy the challenge of testing myself against others. To be sure, it may not be the most profound test one can undergo. But in 2022 it's the best we have.

Perfectly put.

The only people that obsess over this question are the ones with some type of repressed hatred about themselves. Quite sad really.

i mean i'm not arguing the flip side but that is definitely not perfectly put. obviously not all priests are a detriment to society because some of them might like pedo party. you think there aren't care workers or journalists truly making a positive difference from the goodness of their hearts?

the problem with poker, in this aspect, is that you can go into it with the best intentions for producing a net good contribution to the world but the ceiling for doing so is pretty damn low due to the nature of the job.

The best we have? This is utter horseshit. Sellout Comes to mind when reading this nonsense..

I seem to have touched a nerve with my contribution to this thread. Excellent. Discuss is always a good thing. But a few more comments. I don't see how I'm a 'sellout' for stating the facts. I come to my opinions from the perspective of 67 years of life and 32 years in Chicago journalism. I have a pretty good idea of how the world works. I get the impression that those who disagreed with me are of a younger age. If I am correct in that assumption then I totally understand their point of view. Young people believe that if just this and that happen all will be well. Well, I used to believe like that too. But old age has gotten me to the point where I understand that all we can control and help is our immediate surroundings. And sometimes not even that. Please understand I'm not saying to give up. Rather have a more mature view of things. And sadly that includes realizing that every human endeavor ends in at the very least frustration and no one road is much different from another.

It prevents degenerate *******s from getting laid because it keeps them occupied and broke, and that's a social good.

Agreed. It's pointless because we haven't really defined what value/success in life and/or society actually is, and the process by which that is determined tends to be rather subjective and loaded with an almost infinite number of both determinable and indeterminate variables, along with a host of other socio/political and environmental factors. Add to that the fact that it's practically impossible to determine one's overall net positive/negative "butterfly effect" on society.

Personally it seems that many put a large emphasis on their occupation when gauging what's valuable, but just because a certain company values some position at 50-100k doesn't mean it holds an equal value to society. And in most cases, the actual value is found in the job itself and not necessarily the individual doing it. It may hurt our ego, but people aren't as indispensable as we'd like to think.

But regardless, any "value" could easily be offset by how that particular individual conducts their personal life and it's effect on others. Additionally, the offset could be even further compounded by the negative effects of the product/service itself along with various business practices, whether legal or not.

You might remember an interesting documentary called Surviving Progress that discusses how technology and the way we live have scaled to the point where it now threatens to collapse in on itself. And that's easy to imagine when we consider how dependent our society is on technology. So it could be argued that anyone working within such a system ultimately holds a net negative value for their role in what could ultimately destroy that lifestyle.

Contrast that with an individual or a group of individuals that are fully self sufficient/sustainable and contribute nothing to society.

I would give so much to be like this. It's the only thing I've ever been really good at, and I can't stand doing it half the time.

You are in debt because of You

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Brilliant and insightful post.

Playing low stakes I felt I took money from those who could not afford to lose it. (based on peoples reactions)

Playing high stakes I feel like I take money from people who don't need it nearly as much as me. (based on peoples reactions)

Most players playing high stakes are successful somewhere in life, it not poker. Its a completely different enviroment.

You can really never know, I guess. Just know how it feels.

Low stakes poker has a lot of negativity in it. A lot of complaining and ego talk.

Higher stakes poker is a bit more enlightened. A lot more humor.

At least as far as chat goes.

I think it boils down to this..

In order to be good at poker you have to be a self serving narcissist who puts ev above everything else. (Bad reg) Or a covert narc who tricks people into giving more ev later. (Good reg)

The very nature of chasing money instead of doing something philanthropic is problematic.

But the same is true for any job.

So basically the narcs rise to the top in everything, every field, and every organization.

Except for the fact there might be another “scoreboard” way more important for empaths who want to make the world a better place or believe in “good”. It’s free too just costs thought and action a la doing the right thing.

Writing for Fox? I mean there's bad **** everywhere so that's going to control your out look on life? There is a lot of good to, but don't let that get in the way. Your perspective is utter garbage in my opinion. Being old and seeing the world as total **** is cliche.

That's not what he's saying dude. There's bad sht everywhere, so there's no legitimate reason to look down one's nose and single out poker players just because all the bad sht in other occupations and people's personal lives isn't as transparent as it is in poker.

This is whataboutism. Gambling is well understood to be a societal net negative i.e., the harm outweighs the benefit, despite monte carloco's point about societal values being ill-defined. Gambling doesn't produce anything of both utility and value that others can benefit from. You could thinly argue that it produces dopamine highs in people, but that is a highly dubious and disingenuous argument

Whatever society's values may be, gambling can't inherently provide real, tangible value. Entertainment and excitement, you say? This is a weak argument, because it's not like other businesses where you put in $X and you get Y product or service. It doesn't provide a product, and it's not really a service. When you enter a supermarket and buy goods, those are fixed tangibles that get you value for your dollar. It's the same when you go to a barber, mechanic, or dentist. When you enter a casino it's not the same in the slightest.

Gambling is not a dispensatory activity that provides some measurable gain when you put in money that you could argue has some fixed output and you always get what you pay for. Fundamentally, it's a parasitic activity. It's leeching money from people through random probability events whose expected values are weighted in your favour to varying degrees. It's feeding people longshot hopes and dreams, like those asinine late night infomercials.

Poker and gambling don't benefit society. It benefits a handful of clever individuals with big bankrolls, be they a casino owner or a pro poker player. But that's fine. We just need to admit that instead of bullshitting ourselves and others, and move on.

if we’re talking 5/10 I’m pretty sure most recs can’t afford to lose whatever they lose there, 50/100+ however you might have a point bar very few exceptions

This entire premise is a whataboutism. We're basically saying that these industries over here provide a certain benefit to society, so whatabout poker? So I think it's fair game. The fact is that there are benefits, it's just that they may be more indirect and/or harder to measure and it's up to the indivial how they balance it all out. I think the real issue here should be on how to mitigate the seemingly larger propensity for gamling to cause damage to one's personal life.



Revenue from gambling was a major source of income for the original colonies and was used to fund the revolutionary war. Gambling in Michigan alone has given 27 billion dollars to help fund schooling. Downtown Detroit has received a massive overhaul of improvemts to it's infrastructure largely due to casinos both directly and indirectly.

One can argue that the crime rate started to go up again, but that's largely due to the fact that Detroit lost nearly half of it's population 10-15 years ago, so of course the crime rate is going to go up if eveyone is leaving except the criminals. And why were people leaving and/or resorting to crime in the first place? Because of questionable business practices of those in the housing market and parasitic union contracts that were destroying the auto industry along with the lives of the workers they were supposedly "protecting."

So again, it's all a matter of perspective. Anyone preoccupied with this should ask themselves why, becuse it sounds more like a personal issue. Maybe they just overestimate their sense of self importance. Perhaps they're just insecure, or jealous, or looking to validate themselves for whatever reason through the criticism of others that they know absoulutely nothing about.

The other occupations he mentioned have a lot of value. He just named off bad scenarios and actors. It's Roggan philosoph, aka bullshit.
Poker has how many good actors and scenarios of value? Would poker players contribute a dime if not forced too?

Okay fine, so let's start with state governments who have no business being in the gambling business. Lotteries are how governments get poor people to pay taxes. If politicians really were for the "little guy," they would abolish state lotteries. (obviously that's never gonna happen)
I would beg to differ. Various casino building booms over the last 40-50 years have provided solid well-paying employment for general contractors, architects, design engineers, iron workers, electricians, masons and so on. Casinos have provided entry, junior, mid level employment opportunities for those who might not have had it otherwise (croupiers, floorpersons, entertainers, bartenders, chefs/cooks, maids, janitors, mechnical/electrical operators, valets, etc.). From the technology side, large numbers of highly paid positions (network infrastructure, physical/network security, IOT, handheld/desktop, applications, IaaS/PaaS cloud services, etc.)

On the other hand, do I think casinos are good solutions for economic growth in depressed economies like Baltimore, Philly, Detroit, Tunica, etc.? Not really, I think in those cases, casinos are lazy ways out for politicians, civic leaders, chambers of commerce, etc. IMHO, they do tend to suck more money out of the local economies than they bring in.

IMHO, important to treat Nevada separately, because the gambling business is directly/indirectly responsible for the vast majority of the state economy, unlike the rest of the USA. It used to be 90-95% a while back, not sure now.

Let's not forget that there are fun, non-damaging ways to play too: micro stakes home games and bar poker leagues for prizes like bar tabs (no money involved on the table). Poker is not all that bad, even though I tend to agree with the premise that it is a net negative for most except for the businesses, well-paid employees, and highest-earning pros (who still pay heaps of rake). That's very few actors in a vast ecosystem.

Like most issues poker can have pro's and cons. As mentioned, the gaming industry does employ a large number of workers and thus a payroll tax that supports infrastructure, the war machine and the resulting consumer spending that propels the economy.

The downside of course is degen behavior and the negative effects that come with it. In Nevada the gaming industry controls state and local government which is why it is a felony to not pay a marker and the lottery isn't allowed since it may eat into their income.

The one industry that always follows the construction of a new casino? Pawn shops.

Since this planet is having trouble supporting about 8 billion humans, the flu, covid and other pandemic issues spread by the gaming crowds can help distribute death and disease which may hasten the destruction of mankind, or at least thin the herd so there will be more resources for the remaining lot.

Some of us, being pirates, have no desire or aspirations of contributing to a poisonous society.

Under a black flag we sail, and our ship shall be our empire.

If you are playing poker because of its contributions to society you are on the wrong path.

I often feel that it's an addiction to gambling that maybe should be illegal. I go back and forth between making all drugs,and everything legal
(Let's light this candle!) Or really we need to phase out the thing that are a total net negative. Sure there will always be people doing drugs and gamble, but making it understood its a world of **** could save a few souls.
Gambling and drugs are always fun at first, but it probably goes bad for 98 percent of the people that go that route.

I'm two years older than you, I grew up in Chicago, lived on the South Side for about 30 years. I used to read everything from the Tribune to Mohammed Speaks to the Reader.

I don't know in what area you practice journalism in Chicago, but EVERY journalist is a "sellout" to some extent in order to get assigned certain stories and get their work edited and published. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Crit...Pure_Tolerance

Technology is a wonderful thing however; you and any journalist can self-publish on the internet. Do you ?

(Poker is good for expanding your experience if you play with strangers in the mix. Poker also allowed me to meet living expenses , pay my tab at Valois and Jimmy's and on occasion post late-night cash bail for acquaintances (in pre-ATM days). The latter was a social benefit for hippies, potheads and their dealers.)