PA Blackjack Update

aslan

Well-Known Member
#21
Blue Efficacy said:
Not to get off topic, but people really ARE poor because others are rich.

See: Scarcity.
Poverty in the way I use it is not a relative term. But I do understand your point. In a country where some poor have 50" LCD TVs, never miss a meal, and own a car or two, granted not a new Escalade, the term loses much of its meaning. But trust me, there are "poor" in an absolute sense in this country, sometimes without a roof over their heads, living from hand to mouth doubtful where their next meal is coming from, and whose only form of transportation are their feet and an occasional bus. Didn't I just see a thread on people living in the storm sewers under Caesar's Palace? Wow! And I've seen worse. :(
 
#22
aslan said:
Poverty in the way I use it is not a relative term. But I do understand your point. In a country where some poor have 50" LCD TVs, never miss a meal, and own a car or two, granted not a new Escalade, the term loses much of its meaning. But trust me, there are "poor" in an absolute sense in this country, sometimes without a roof over their heads, living from hand to mouth doubtful where their next meal is coming from, and whose only form of transportation are their feet and an occasional bus. Didn't I just see a thread on people living in the storm sewers under Caesar's Palace? Wow! And I've seen worse. :(
A millionaire may feel poor in a room full of billionaires, but when people are poor in the sense that they're living in a storm drain, that is always a symptom of some other problem.

It relates to AP and gambling in that the typical fortune-seeking ploppy sees wealth around him and convinces himself that all those people "just got lucky" and this slot machine or blackjack table is his chance to get lucky too. He doesn't realize (or believe) that most rich people worked very hard to get what they got, and might believe they claimed it at his expense. Likewise, when he sees you split 9's against the dealer's 6 and "take the dealer's bust card" he doesn't know nor care that you did what you did because of your training which is based on mathematical science, he sees you as another guy driving around in his Escalade. But over the years he probably gambles away enough money to regularly buy a new car for himself. It's much easier to blame others than to blame one's own ignorance and bad habits for undesired outcomes.
 

FLASH1296

Well-Known Member
#23
Automatic Monkey said:
I don't agree. I think a lot of them are there to win money rather than make money. They desire to win, but refuse to accept that the basis for winning is mathematics applied with skill, not luck, fate, righteousness, etc.

Look at the abuse they heap on skilled players. They believe winning is their right, and they are being denied it by the actions of others. It is a paradigm of their lot in life. Just like all the people out there who believe they are poor only because others are rich.
I agree with the above. It is well said.

Interestingly, when a typical innumerate ploppy is reminded that …
"Only the House Wins in the Long Run" they almost always
acknowledge and agree with same.

This actually supports what is quoted above, as peeps generally
have a fine facility to compartmentalize their pet (self-serving)
beliefs, to keep them unchallenged by mathematical reality.
 

daddybo

Well-Known Member
#25
Blue Efficacy said:
Not to get off topic, but people really ARE poor because others are rich.

See: Scarcity.
That is probably the stupidest statement I have ever heard anyone make. That would mean all assets are fixed in quantity and some people just aren't letting other people have them.

It takes work and/or occasional luck. Mostly a lot of discipline and work. You have to be willing to do what is necessary to succeed. You have to pick your sorry ass back up when you get hammered... you have to use your head.

I really hate this kind of whining. :cry:" I would have some money if all the mean old rich people didn't have it all or would GIVE me some." :cry: I hope my rich uncle dies and leaves me some money...I can sit on my ass and wait. :cry:

If you think anybody deserves anything just because they are the product of the sperm that made the trip... you are sadly mistaken and in for a long disappointing life.
 
Last edited:

aslan

Well-Known Member
#26
Automatic Monkey said:
A millionaire may feel poor in a room full of billionaires, but when people are poor in the sense that they're living in a storm drain, that is always a symptom of some other problem.

It relates to AP and gambling in that the typical fortune-seeking ploppy sees wealth around him and convinces himself that all those people "just got lucky" and this slot machine or blackjack table is his chance to get lucky too. He doesn't realize (or believe) that most rich people worked very hard to get what they got, and might believe they claimed it at his expense. Likewise, when he sees you split 9's against the dealer's 6 and "take the dealer's bust card" he doesn't know nor care that you did what you did because of your training which is based on mathematical science, he sees you as another guy driving around in his Escalade. But over the years he probably gambles away enough money to regularly buy a new car for himself. It's much easier to blame others than to blame one's own ignorance and bad habits for undesired outcomes.
Yes, there are two kinds of poor. Those who have only themselves to blame, and those who find themselves victims of tragic circumstances. But in either case, there is "usually" a way out for those who seek it. Poverty in the US should not be a permanent condition in most cases, and people have themselves to blame if it is.
 

Thunder

Well-Known Member
#27
Aslan,
What would you say then to the person who got laid off from their job, then has a spouse who needs to be treated for cancer and because he lost his job, no longer has health insurance. That right there is a prime example of why many good people find themselves in big trouble and end up in poverty.
 

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#29
daddybo said:
That is probably the stupidest statement I have ever heard anyone make. That would mean all assets are fixed in quantity and some people just aren't letting other people have them.

It takes work and/or occasional luck. Mostly a lot of discipline and work. You have to be willing to do what is necessary to succeed. You have to pick your sorry ass back up when you get hammered... you have to use your head.

I really hate this kind of whining. :cry:" I would have some money if all the mean old rich people didn't have it all or would GIVE me some." :cry: I hope my rich uncle dies and leaves me some money...I can sit on my ass and wait. :cry:

If you think anybody deserves anything just because they are the product of the sperm that made the trip... you are sadly mistaken and in for a long disappointing life.
Let's see you find a way to create more land, which in the end is the only form of wealth that really matters.

Did I ever say that rich people should give poor people money? While I believe this is true in a way (see: taxation) I did not specificly state this in my post and you foolishly assumed that.

If a rich person consumes a large proportion of an available food supply, wasting much of it, and the peasants are starving, well, I look at someone who sees these two situations as not being connected as pretty damn stupid. Since we are going to call people stupid on this board if they say something we don't agree with. :confused:

Scarcity is a basic principle on which economics is based. Pretty stupid.

And if you have a group of people who are consuming a disproportionate amount of resources, then obviously the remainder of the population has less available.

I guess I am stupid for not thinking the poor group of people isn't working hard or is disciplined enough to make more land, more resources, etc magically appear out of thin air.

Sure, some assets are not fixed, but many are. Some of the most important assets in the world are fixed. Land and water, both fixed. And even if they are not fixed, a few greedy hoarders can make it so there is none left for the rest of us no matter what the situation. The white settlers stole a lot of land from the Native Americans. But according to daddybo, all they needed to do was work hard, buckle down, use their heads and create more land. :laugh:

I love your line of thinking though. You more or less dismiss the fact that many rich people do nothing to get their wealth, and many people who are talented and have worked hard their whole life and have nothing to show for it. Also, it can be debated how ethical some of these rich people are when acquiring their wealth, to be sure.

Life is like one shoe of BJ. Being hard working and skilled improves your chances, but you can still get burned while the fool sitting next to you can win every hand. Some of the successful players do it through luck, some through determined study of the game and hard work, and others use outright cheating.

Sorry to be long winded but I despise when people get on the high horse of "all poor people deserve to be poor because they are dirty and lazy, flea ridden vermin, and rich people deserve everything they have because they are all beautiful, intelligent, benevolent creatures who have earned everything the hard way." And furthermore, i despise it even more when these people directly insult me and my intelligence.

I may clash with daddybo's narrow minded views. That doesn't make me stupid.
 

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#30
Thunder said:
Aslan,
What would you say then to the person who got laid off from their job, then has a spouse who needs to be treated for cancer and because he lost his job, no longer has health insurance. That right there is a prime example of why many good people find themselves in big trouble and end up in poverty.
No, they deserved it. They must not have prayed hard enough. Or they are dirty, lazy people who fought off poverty to that point by sheer luck which finally ran out.

Maybe if they worked harder their company wouldn't have laid them off. If they had, they could have single handedly stopped their plant from being closed.
 

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#31
aslan said:
Yes, there are two kinds of poor. Those who have only themselves to blame, and those who find themselves victims of tragic circumstances. But in either case, there is "usually" a way out for those who seek it. Poverty in the US should not be a permanent condition in most cases, and people have themselves to blame if it is.
I love it, you don't think people should have affordable health care (of course medical costs are one of the largest reasons people find themselves in poverty) but people shouldn't be poor either. The choices, die or be poor.

You must honestly think your God is just smiting those he doesn't like.
 

ChefJJ

Well-Known Member
#32
Albee said:
What the heck happen to this post? Kinda took a nose dive.
I agree!!! Someone please cut the off-topic posts into another thread somewhere else. This was a good thread to keep up to date on PA Blackjack developments (not just a coincidence).

Thank you.

good luck:joker:
 

johndoe

Well-Known Member
#33
assume_R said:
Reference?
You're kidding, right?

Is it really your belief that the amount of wealth in the world is fixed, and is just redistributed as time goes on? It's absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum#Economics

"Assuming the counterparties are acting rationally, any commercial exchange is a non-zero-sum activity, because each party must consider the goods it is receiving as being at least fractionally more valuable than the goods it is delivering."

There sure are a lot of economic transactions going on, and essentially all of them are generating wealth.
 

Blue Efficacy

Well-Known Member
#34
johndoe said:
You're kidding, right?

Is it really your belief that the amount of wealth in the world is fixed, and is just redistributed as time goes on? It's absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum#Economics

"Assuming the counterparties are acting rationally, any commercial exchange is a non-zero-sum activity, because each party must consider the goods it is receiving as being at least fractionally more valuable than the goods it is delivering."

There sure are a lot of economic transactions going on, and essentially all of them are generating wealth.
But also it must be considered that there is a certain point where no more wealth can be generated. Or no more wheat can be grown. Etc.

No resource is infinite.

Btw sorry for derailing the topic.
 

daddybo

Well-Known Member
#35
Boy, that got you going... I posted it so you would think about what you're saying... You are smarter than that. You are reacting ... NOT thinking.

Blue Efficacy said:
Let's see you find a way to create more land, which in the end is the only form of wealth that really matters.
Land is created all the time... it's called fill dirt. Dubai created a whole Island.... I know you really don't think that land is the only form of wealth that matters. The greatest treasures cannot be held or owned. You will learn that one day. (I hope)

Blue Efficacy said:
Did I ever say that rich people should give poor people money? While I believe this is true in a way (see: taxation) I did not specificly state this in my post and you foolishly assumed that.
I never assumed anything... I just posted some quotes from whiny people I've heard.

Blue Efficacy said:
If a rich person consumes a large proportion of an available food supply, wasting much of it, and the peasants are starving, well, I look at someone who sees these two situations as not being connected as pretty damn stupid. Since we are going to call people stupid on this board if they say something we don't agree with. :confused:
First of all the rich seldom waste anything (that's how they got that way) and in fact usually create even more bounty for the masses. (jobs, grants, scholarships, research, Iphones, xboxes, taxes, etc.). If your starving .. eat your dog.. or your neighbors' dog or your neighbor. Grow something. Just take it from a fat guy ... don't whine.

I never called you or anyone else stupid... just your statement.

Blue Efficacy said:
Scarcity is a basic principle on which economics is based. Pretty stupid.
Actually scarcity coupled with demand dictate value. If your statement were true, then certain baculums would be worth a fortune.

Blue Efficacy said:
And if you have a group of people who are consuming a disproportionate amount of resources, then obviously the remainder of the population has less available.
Only if the resources are fixed... and how does that make one poor/ wealthy?

Blue Efficacy said:
I guess I am stupid for not thinking the poor group of people isn't working hard or is disciplined enough to make more land, more resources, etc magically appear out of thin air.
Tell me what resource shortage we have that is not politically created. Resources come from thin air all the time. Just because you work hard doesn't mean you deserve any more than you worked for.

Blue Efficacy said:
Sure, some assets are not fixed, but many are. Some of the most important assets in the world are fixed. Land and water, both fixed. And even if they are not fixed, a few greedy hoarders can make it so there is none left for the rest of us no matter what the situation. The white settlers stole a lot of land from the Native Americans. But according to daddybo, all they needed to do was work hard, buckle down, use their heads and create more land. :laugh:
This is why we have wars. Water is not fixed. I can make water too. Land is not fixed either. Space on the planet is fixed.. water and land can be moved around. Actually white settlers didn't steal land from anyone. The Government did... you know the Government that wants to make us all have equal resources. Besides, Native Americans for the most part did not believe in ownership of the land.., that was a European concept. The NAs were defeated because the Europeans were more powerful, not because they had more money.... In reality the NA's were much wealthier than the ones that took it away. You are confusing power with wealth.

Blue Efficacy said:
I love your line of thinking though. You more or less dismiss the fact that many rich people do nothing to get their wealth, and many people who are talented and have worked hard their whole life and have nothing to show for it. Also, it can be debated how ethical some of these rich people are when acquiring their wealth, to be sure.
Most rich people have worked very hard and taken many risks to succeed. They sometimes pass large fortunes to their heirs. If they couldn't do that they would waste it on a lavish lifestyle or whatever... but they still ain't gonna give it to some whiny ass that thinks they are entitled. Life ain't fair. Being talented and working hard will not always make you wealthy... but it will probably make you happy and healthy. (that' true wealth)

Blue Efficacy said:
Life is like one shoe of BJ. Being hard working and skilled improves your chances, but you can still get burned while the fool sitting next to you can win every hand. Some of the successful players do it through luck, some through determined study of the game and hard work, and others use outright cheating.
Such is life.. so?

Blue Efficacy said:
Sorry to be long winded but I despise when people get on the high horse of "all poor people deserve to be poor because they are dirty and lazy, flea ridden vermin, and rich people deserve everything they have because they are all beautiful, intelligent, benevolent creatures who have earned everything the hard way." And furthermore, i despise it even more when these people directly insult me and my intelligence.
I never said any of that. I know a lot of very ugly wealthy peeps... and some damn hot poor ones. I never insulted your intelligence.. just your lazy thinking.

Blue Efficacy said:
I may clash with daddybo's narrow minded views. That doesn't make me stupid.
I think your view is narrow minded in that you are saying that nobody can help themselves and must rely on the benevolence of others for success. In Essence the havenots are victims of the haves.... Bullsh*t

How can my view be narrow minded, when I'm saying I believe anything is possible for all people rich and poor if they go after it and don't stand around with their finger up their butt waiting for somebody to make life fair.

I never accused you of being stupid... actually I think the contrary.. but you need to question your assumptions. I wanted you to think.
 
Last edited:

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#36
johndoe said:
You're kidding, right?

Is it really your belief that the amount of wealth in the world is fixed, and is just redistributed as time goes on? It's absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum#Economics

"Assuming the counterparties are acting rationally, any commercial exchange is a non-zero-sum activity, because each party must consider the goods it is receiving as being at least fractionally more valuable than the goods it is delivering."

There sure are a lot of economic transactions going on, and essentially all of them are generating wealth.
I wasn't biased towards not believing you, I just wanted to know some references to learn about it, because I haven't thought too much in terms of economics.

But now that I think about it, if you consider the amount of resources (read: raw materials) in the world fixed, then even though both parties believe they are getting more than they gave, the total amount of resources in the transaction is fixed, regardless of what the parties "think". This is because some resources are more valuable to certain people.

However, now that I think about it even more, I do believe that when resources are engineered together to then the result is greater than the sum of the parts. So a canoe is more useful than a bunch of pieces of wood, which would make the world a non-zero-sum situation.

As an aside I also wouldn't mind if the mods broke off these posts to a separate thread so the PA Bj update could remain solely on this thread.
 

daddybo

Well-Known Member
#37
assume_R said:
As an aside I also wouldn't mind if the mods broke off these posts to a separate thread so the PA Bj update could remain solely on this thread.
I concur... this has turned into an interesting topic in itself. (albeit a rabbit trail from the original and useful topic.)
 

johndoe

Well-Known Member
#38
assume_R said:
However, now that I think about it even more, I do believe that when resources are engineered together to then the result is greater than the sum of the parts. So a canoe is more useful than a bunch of pieces of wood, which would make the world a non-zero-sum situation.
Yep, that's absolutely key. We can create hugely valuable things out of near-nothing, if we have the brainpower. That's the real beauty.
 

assume_R

Well-Known Member
#39
johndoe said:
Yep, that's absolutely key. We can create hugely valuable things out of near-nothing, if we have the brainpower. That's the real beauty.
Yeah, seems we are on the same page now. As in the laws of thermodynamics, there is no truly closed system (which a zero-sum-game implies). So for example, I suppose we can say that the amount of energy on the earth is fixed, but then we consider the solar power that is constantly being added to the "earth's" system. This can be extended ad-infinitum. And remember, the "value" of a resources is usually based on a common agreement between people. Our canoes have different value for termites ;). Silly example, but I'm just trying to show "value" or "wealth" is somewhat subjective.
 

aslan

Well-Known Member
#40
Blue Efficacy said:
I love it, you don't think people should have affordable health care (of course medical costs are one of the largest reasons people find themselves in poverty) but people shouldn't be poor either. The choices, die or be poor.

You must honestly think your God is just smiting those he doesn't like.
We already had universal health care before Obama. We didn't have universal health care insurance.
 
Top