Being told "professional poker doesn't contribute to society."

[Lyric]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good point.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really. redistributing wealth from individuals to the government doesn't qualify as contributing imo.

the point that plenty of other occupations don't contribute is valid, but that doesn't make being a poker player any "better" imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is contributing to society... just in a less efficient manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

The government builds roads, free healthcare for the poor, etc. It's not effecient but some of my tax dollars actually do go towards helping other people. The rest go to bombing people in other societies, but that's okay because the bombs help them live better lives, in freedom!

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Good point.

[/ QUOTE ]

not really. redistributing wealth from individuals to the government doesn't qualify as contributing imo.

the point that plenty of other occupations don't contribute is valid, but that doesn't make being a poker player any "better" imo.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is contributing to society... just in a less efficient manner.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain?

[/ QUOTE ]

The government builds roads, free healthcare for the poor, etc. It's not effecient but some of my tax dollars actually do go towards helping other people. The rest go to bombing people in other societies, but that's okay because the bombs help them live better lives, in freedom!

[/ QUOTE ]

when you consider taxes and spending habits and the velocity of money yadda yadda economic efficiency blah blah social stability poopoop it just comes down to an economic argument, but the bottom line is that you're doing nothing to increase society's total wealth. you consume without producing. you're a leech on society.

the effect you achieve by paying "extra" tax (and i put it in quotes because it could be that more tax would be paid if the money was spent in some other way) is basically an effective increase of the tax rate. it doesn't "contribute" in any way.

if it bothers you that you're not able to explain how you contribute, you should find another profession, because you don't contribute.

[Jamougha]

Nope, we don't contribute a damn thing. We just take what we want, 'cuz we can.

I think it's kinda neat.

[warrantofice]

Well i think this whole idea that poker pro do not contribute to society is a little bit silly. I mean think about the idea. Casino's offer games of chance against the casino. These games are stacked in their favour. People play these games. Casino's offers games of chance that are played against other players, game offers chance but also skill. The game is partially weighted towards the casino. People play these games. Casino offers that are complete chance so they earn money 24/7. Pro Poker players play poker 24/7 to earn money. Pro Players and Casino's are both considered legal entities. Only poker players grapple with their legitimacy within society.
Some people tried to argue that only a poker player can truly ask the question, "what do I contribute to society" Or atleast not come up with a good answer...could they also " if i didn't do this- somebody else would"
-
I mean "It's immoral to let a sucker keep his money. "

[Tien]

[ QUOTE ]

when you consider taxes and spending habits and the velocity of money yadda yadda economic efficiency blah blah social stability poopoop it just comes down to an economic argument, but the bottom line is that you're doing nothing to increase society's total wealth. you consume without producing. you're a leech on society.

the effect you achieve by paying "extra" tax (and i put it in quotes because it could be that more tax would be paid if the money was spent in some other way) is basically an effective increase of the tax rate. it doesn't "contribute" in any way.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you just dodged the entire statement.


If Lyric makes 200 000$ a year paying poker and paid 100 000$ last year in taxes, that 100 000$ he paid in taxes is money the US government would have never seen ever again if he or some other pro didn't win the money.

That 100 000$ was used to pay for 3 police officer's salaries.

Without these online poker "professionals" paying taxes, all that online money would never return to the United States ever again.

This argument about contribution is old and really really subjective to argue.


But really, 99.99% of the people working aren't doing it to "contribute" to society, they are merely working jobs so that they can make money and feed their kids.

It's human nature you have a problem about if you are arguing over "contribution". How many people out there would quit working their 9-5 "contributing" jobs if they suddenly were given the skill to make 150-200K a year playing poker?

Humans are greedy animals and "contribution to society" is often times at the bottom of the priority list when it comes to making money.

[stinkypete]

[ QUOTE ]

I think you just dodged the entire statement.


[/ QUOTE ]

not at all

[ QUOTE ]

If Lyric makes 200 000$ a year paying poker and paid 100 000$ last year in taxes, that 100 000$ he paid in taxes is money the US government would have never seen ever again if he or some other pro didn't win the money.

[/ QUOTE ]

i'm not gonna try to explain why this is entirely wrong beyond what i said in the last post, but i'll say that you should study economics a bit before you try to make that argument.

[ QUOTE ]


That 100 000$ was used to pay for 3 police officer's salaries.

Without these online poker "professionals" paying taxes, all that online money would never return to the United States ever again.



[/ QUOTE ]

well if your definition of society/the economy is "the united states" your point is valid, but i prefer to consider the whole world.

you're wrong when you say "all that online money would never return to the United States ever again". a lot of the sites have american owners, etc.

and we're not just talking about online pros here.

[ QUOTE ]

But really, 99.99% of the people working aren't doing it to "contribute" to society, they are merely working jobs so that they can make money and feed their kids.

It's human nature you have a problem about if you are arguing over "contribution". How many people out there would quit working their 9-5 "contributing" jobs if they suddenly were given the skill to make 150-200K a year playing poker?

Humans are greedy animals and "contribution to society" is often times at the bottom of the priority list when it comes to making money.

[/ QUOTE ]

you're right, but that's not what this discussion is about.

[borisp]

Here is my take on why there is value in being a professional poker player...it is essentially an elaboration on how pros provide entertainment.

In general, there is value created when human beings choose to cooperate with one another. Cooperation allows us to live longer and healthier lives. Anything that tends to initiate cooperation, regardless of its direct rationality, productivity, etc., is therefore valuable. Poker is a social game that can spark or strengthen relationships among the people playing, which can lead to increased cooperation down the road. The value of this future cooperation is speculative, but it is no doubt very real. Most entertaining activities fall under this heading.

Now, the average citizen may choose one of many things on any particular day to socialize, cooperate, what have you. It is important for a complex society to have many available choices, as the availability of variety strengthens the overall willingness of its citizens to persist as cooperative individuals. Average Joe goes out drinking one night, he sees a movie another night, and he goes to the casino (or plays on the internet) on yet another night. In order to do all of this, Joe shows up to work every day.

Casinos and professional gamblers have struck a symbiotic relationship: those who gamble every day show up so that there is always a game, and in exchange, the casino pays the bills and lets them hang out to make profit. On any given day, perhaps half of the players are taken from that tiny fraction of the overall population that is "pro," but the other half is taken from a much larger sample of recreational players who are enjoying the benefits of the society that they have helped create. Servers/bartenders have a similar relationship with restaurants/bars.

The fact that one can make money playing poker is only a side effect of the fact that it is socially valuable, and is irrelevant, since there are plenty of worthwhile activities that are not monetarily profitable. The tax argument is also irrelevant, as it is a side effect of one being able to make money.

And all of the people spouting crap like "if you can't justify your own profession then it is because there is no justification" need to realize that the failure of one's intellect is not an insight into the nature of reality.

[Nick Royale]

Saying poker players contribute to society by paying taxes is silly. I'm glad stinkypete already has owned that discussion so I don't have to waste my time on it.

[mce86]

[ QUOTE ]
Here is my take on why there is value in being a professional poker player...it is essentially an elaboration on how pros provide entertainment.

In general, there is value created when human beings choose to cooperate with one another. Cooperation allows us to live longer and healthier lives. Anything that tends to initiate cooperation, regardless of its direct rationality, productivity, etc., is therefore valuable. Poker is a social game that can spark or strengthen relationships among the people playing, which can lead to increased cooperation down the road. The value of this future cooperation is speculative, but it is no doubt very real. Most entertaining activities fall under this heading.

Now, the average citizen may choose one of many things on any particular day to socialize, cooperate, what have you. It is important for a complex society to have many available choices, as the availability of variety strengthens the overall willingness of its citizens to persist as cooperative individuals. Average Joe goes out drinking one night, he sees a movie another night, and he goes to the casino (or plays on the internet) on yet another night. In order to do all of this, Joe shows up to work every day.

Casinos and professional gamblers have struck a symbiotic relationship: those who gamble every day show up so that there is always a game, and in exchange, the casino pays the bills and lets them hang out to make profit. On any given day, perhaps half of the players are taken from that tiny fraction of the overall population that is "pro," but the other half is taken from a much larger sample of recreational players who are enjoying the benefits of the society that they have helped create. Servers/bartenders have a similar relationship with restaurants/bars.

The fact that one can make money playing poker is only a side effect of the fact that it is socially valuable, and is irrelevant, since there are plenty of worthwhile activities that are not monetarily profitable. The tax argument is also irrelevant, as it is a side effect of one being able to make money.

And all of the people spouting crap like "if you can't justify your own profession then it is because there is no justification" need to realize that the failure of one's intellect is not an insight into the nature of reality.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL......being intelligent, doesnt make you right.
I suppose strip clubs contribute to society because males like to "socilize" and help beautiful women support themselves! It is entertainment, nothing more. Online pros...they dont even contribute that, so they are even more useless....but rich!
If Jesus returned and took ALL professional poker players with him (since most think they are divene anyway), the world wouldnt skip a beat!

[mittman84]

[ QUOTE ]

If Lyric makes 200 000$ a year paying poker and paid 100 000$ last year in taxes, that 100 000$ he paid in taxes is money the US government would have never seen ever again if he or some other pro didn't win the money.

[/ QUOTE ]
You lose at this argument.