Creating Value
October 15th, 2012 at 5:13:19 PM
permalink
Here's a definition of creating value:
.."you know you’re creating value when you can see tangible positive changes in the world.."
Some people think being an AP is a worthless job
because it creates nothing of value to the world.
Being an AP indirectly creates the potential for creating
value, like many other professions.
Take gold mining for instance. A man who pans
for gold and finds a nugget, has created nothing.
But he has, with his skill, created the potential
for creating value.
The real created value comes when the AP and the
miner use the cash they get to make the lives of
others better. All money is just potential energy, waiting
to go into action.
An AP uses his skill in a legal profession, and has just
as much right to hold his head high as anybody else,
if he's creating value with the money he wins.
.."you know you’re creating value when you can see tangible positive changes in the world.."
Some people think being an AP is a worthless job
because it creates nothing of value to the world.
Being an AP indirectly creates the potential for creating
value, like many other professions.
Take gold mining for instance. A man who pans
for gold and finds a nugget, has created nothing.
But he has, with his skill, created the potential
for creating value.
The real created value comes when the AP and the
miner use the cash they get to make the lives of
others better. All money is just potential energy, waiting
to go into action.
An AP uses his skill in a legal profession, and has just
as much right to hold his head high as anybody else,
if he's creating value with the money he wins.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 15th, 2012 at 6:24:50 PM
permalink
Money is a token of trade. It doesn't matter what you do with that money, only what your benefactor derives from it.
When you give it to charity, do you think they chant incantations above it to heal the world? No, they give it to other people, who expect it as a token of trade. Little value is created, but rather the value that was already to be created is given to people who wouldn't have normally been able to partake of it. This has a value in itself, and people are rewarded for it, meagerly, directly, voluntarily. You could be one of those people! You just prefer to see how much you can legally swindle from people with only so much incentive to stop you, and claim that by moving around the tokens you have, you've done something else. Who says the owner wasn't going to give a fair chunk of his money to charity? No, you know the inescapable logical extension of the belief you now espouse, and I suspect you revile it.
(Hey, but any excuse to make a career out of finagling free chips out of a vending machine, right?)
When you give it to charity, do you think they chant incantations above it to heal the world? No, they give it to other people, who expect it as a token of trade. Little value is created, but rather the value that was already to be created is given to people who wouldn't have normally been able to partake of it. This has a value in itself, and people are rewarded for it, meagerly, directly, voluntarily. You could be one of those people! You just prefer to see how much you can legally swindle from people with only so much incentive to stop you, and claim that by moving around the tokens you have, you've done something else. Who says the owner wasn't going to give a fair chunk of his money to charity? No, you know the inescapable logical extension of the belief you now espouse, and I suspect you revile it.
(Hey, but any excuse to make a career out of finagling free chips out of a vending machine, right?)
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 15th, 2012 at 7:20:03 PM
permalink
Quote: 24Bingo
When you give it to charity, do you think they chant incantations above it to heal the world? No, they give it to other people, who expect it as a token of trade. Little value is created,
Depends on the charity. When you give money, you're
letting other people create value with it. You are
essentially buying their professional time to do something
you can't do.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 16th, 2012 at 12:14:19 PM
permalink
Again, they're not creating value with the money. Other people are creating value for the money. The money is the money.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 16th, 2012 at 12:20:01 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBob
All money is just potential energy, waiting
to go into action.
That is a compelling statement.
I think of money this way: It is a social lubricant, that makes feasible the engine of commerce between people, countries, etc. From there we (hopefully) realize increased standards of living, reductions in poverty and disease, etc. etc.
You gotta change the oil in the engine at times. And refill the tank.
October 17th, 2012 at 11:45:42 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobAll money is just potential energy, waiting
to go into action
Certainly is an interesting way to look at things. I've always taken the position that money is nothing more than an efficient way to exchange resources
We both agree that someone who picks through trash and sells his finds at the swap meet hasn't created anything. But he has resources to trade. Instead of dollars a baker could give him cookies and a hairdresser could give him a haircut for his jewelry and DVDs
If not for cash, what could the card counter put on the table to risk? What could the house offer in exchange for a winning hand?
October 17th, 2012 at 1:20:18 PM
permalink
Quote: TomG
We both agree that someone who picks through trash and sells his finds at the swap meet hasn't created anything.
I knew a guy who supported his family doing that.
Dumpster diving for metal and swap meet finds.
Going to grocery store dumpsters and getting 20
packs of expired bagals and putting them in the
deep freeze. His wife cut coupons and could get
3 carts of food and never pay a dime. They were
proud of the way they lived. I thought it was, well,
odd..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 17th, 2012 at 1:38:31 PM
permalink
Quote: TomGWe both agree that someone who picks through trash and sells his finds at the swap meet hasn't created anything.
Not sure I agree with this. If we assume that the item is already in the dump and was not to be recovered except for the dumpster diver's efforts, then what he had done is the same thing as the manufacturer, he has brought the item into existence from an economic standpoint. He is turning a liability (disposing of garbage is not free) into an asset. He has not actually created anything in the sense of manufacturing a good, but he has created value and is serving the same purpose as that manufacturer.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
October 17th, 2012 at 2:40:35 PM
permalink
Yeah, I'd say dumpster diving is infinitely more productive than professional AP against the house. People destroy a thing's value (mostly) when they throw it away, and abandon their claim. A dumpster diver retrieves this and reintroduced it to society. The key is that the person who threw it away did so voluntarily; they may object to its repurposing, but they lose nothing from it. The destruction of value and its reintroduction are separate events.
I could imagine casino gambling under a barter system - an actuary could convert various non-perishable goods into tokens to use, and the same ultimately back into goods from their store, keeping records so that a watchdog could make sure that the profit is proportionate to the drop.
I could imagine casino gambling under a barter system - an actuary could convert various non-perishable goods into tokens to use, and the same ultimately back into goods from their store, keeping records so that a watchdog could make sure that the profit is proportionate to the drop.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 17th, 2012 at 2:47:14 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoYeah, I'd say dumpster diving is infinitely more productive than professional AP against the house.
Yes, picking thru others garbage is a real goal to
shoot for. Let us know when you arrive, cause
we all know you'll never be an AP..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 17th, 2012 at 2:55:35 PM
permalink
Bingo the barter system business model. really? you jest.
October 17th, 2012 at 5:45:39 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoI could imagine casino gambling under a barter system - an actuary could convert various non-perishable goods into tokens to use, and the same ultimately back into goods from their store, keeping records so that a watchdog could make sure that the profit is proportionate to the drop.
But then the casino would have to be producing something other than cash to compensate winning players. If they instead use cash to buy stuff to pay out winnings, that just reinforces the idea that money is nothing more than a way to exchange resources
October 17th, 2012 at 5:50:44 PM
permalink
No, what I'm saying is, this is assuming there is no cash - they're paying out with what was paid in, not producing anything. Granted, it would be nightmarishly open to abuse, but after all, that's why we invented money n the first place, isn't it? It's just a little thought experiment.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 17th, 2012 at 6:19:40 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoNo, what I'm saying is, this is assuming there is no cash - they're paying out with what was paid in, not producing anything. Granted, it would be nightmarishly open to abuse, but after all, that's why we invented money n the first place, isn't it? It's just a little thought experiment.
Casino gambling doesn't produce anything anyway. It's a service industry, not a goods-producing industry. The business model of gambling is predicated on the typical scenario that total player wagers are greater than (total player payouts + comps + overhead). A casino doesn't produce the games they spread -- they just operate them. The goods-producers in the gambling industry are manufacturers like Bally, IGT, Shuffle Master, etc. who create products (and often intellectual property) for use by the casinos. A movie theater doesn't produce movies either; they just show them. I don't think it'd be accurate to classify "allowing someone to sit in a dark room for two hours while images flash on a screen" as a good, just like I don't think it'd be accurate to classify "allowing someone to throw a pair of dice for a potential payout" as a good.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 17th, 2012 at 6:30:45 PM
permalink
Fair enough. However, both clearly have value that someone finds worth the money/risk.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 17th, 2012 at 6:43:41 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoFair enough. However, both clearly have value that someone finds worth the money/risk.
Of course. Entertainment is always subjective. I can pay $80 for sports tickets and be disappointed when my team loses, or elated when they win, or bemused when the refs blow the call and rule that Golden Tate had possession, but that's part of the entertainment. I can also pay $80 for cheap blackjack for an hour, or on movie tickets + snacks for my family. All forms of entertainment have a cost, even if it's nothing but time. Usually there's monetary cost involved -- some tickets to the upcoming Rolling Stones concerts in NJ are going for almost $10,000. However, unlike every other form of entertainment, in gambling there's a chance that the cost will be negative. And that variable cost is an integral part of the gambling entertainment experience that you can't get going to a concert, movie, or ball game.
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 17th, 2012 at 6:51:27 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremistOf course. Entertainment is always subjective.
How many people leaving a casino would say
they were entertained for the amount of money
they lost? They'd laugh in your face. They go to
a casino to win, not to be entertained. The casino
is there to take your money, not entertain you.
Lets get real.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 17th, 2012 at 8:13:46 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoNo, what I'm saying is, this is assuming there is no cash - they're paying out with what was paid in, not producing anything.
Then it was the gamblers who produced something that they then lost to the casino
October 17th, 2012 at 8:20:58 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobHow many people leaving a casino would say
they were entertained for the amount of money
they lost? They'd laugh in your face. They go to
a casino to win, not to be entertained. The casino
is there to take your money, not entertain you.
Lets get real.
Nobody except the strange like to lose, but it's not just about the winning either. For most gamblers, it's about making the bet in the first place. Why else would you put money down on a negative-ROI proposition when keeping it in your pocket is a better deal?
Why do people go to a casino to win? Surely they know the odds aren't in their favor. With very few exceptions, the gambler has a much, much higher ROI on their time and effort working than gambling. From an investment standpoint, gambling is terrible. So why do people want to win?
It's because the anticipation of winning is extremely enticing. That *is* the entertainment - the bet, not the result. When I walk into a casino, I'm hoping to have a good time and win some money, but for me the most exciting time is while my bets are working, not after I cash out. I'm in Vegas semi-regularly, and I had a good run at the dice table during G2E. I had a much higher expectation of making money if I just went back to my room and did work -- my "win percentage" there is 100%. My hourly income is far higher doing that than I would expect from gambling (the way I play, I expect to lose maybe $10/hour). But I didn't want to work that evening, I wanted to play dice. If you don't call that "entertainment", what do you call it?
"In my own case, when it seemed to me after a long illness that death was close at hand, I found no little solace in playing constantly at dice."
-- Girolamo Cardano, 1563
October 17th, 2012 at 8:31:10 PM
permalink
Quote: MathExtremist
Why do people go to a casino to win? Surely they know the odds aren't in their favor.
My wife knows the slots are against her. It doesn't matter,
she see's others win every time she's there, so it
can be done. Good enough for her.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 17th, 2012 at 8:41:56 PM
permalink
Quote: TomGThen it was the gamblers who produced something that they then lost to the casino
That's right, just like money. I won't say it was in exchange for having a place to try their luck, since that's not really true, from their perspective, since some of them have lost every... can... and some of them walked out ahead. From the casino's perspective, however, that's what they're producing in exchange for it, and from the perspective of the gamblers as a whole, it's something of value.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 17th, 2012 at 9:07:30 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoFrom the casino's perspective, however, that's what they're producing in exchange for it,
Not really. Thats what they're trying to convince us they're
producing, because they know they're not really producing
anything.
I've been going to casinos since 1975 and you never heard
any of this entertainment crap then. They were running
places that catered to greed and people with gambling habits
and everybody knew it. It was when they wanted to change
their image that they were all of a sudden entertainment
producers.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 17th, 2012 at 9:32:27 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobI've been going to casinos since 1975 and you never heard
any of this entertainment crap then. They were running
places that catered to greed and people with gambling habits
and everybody knew it. It was when they wanted to change
their image that they were all of a sudden entertainment
producers.
So don't call it entertainment. The fact remains that they provide a venue to try one's luck, and this has value. This is uncontroversial when the take is explicit, as in poker and sportsbook; what's so hard about extending this to the case where it's implicit?
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 17th, 2012 at 9:42:12 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoSo don't call it entertainment. The fact remains that they provide a venue
So they produce value by providing a venue? I produced
value by not passing gas when I took their money. We're
even.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 5:22:45 AM
permalink
I agree that the Casino provides a service that people want (whether you call it entertainment or whatever other name you give to this service) and therefore create value. Value does not mean in this respect something that is good or bad.
A professional sporstman also creates value.
On a similar way to a professional sportsman, an advantage player creates value.
But you might say that people go to see the sportsman and they pay to get entertained, that's where the value comes from.
Well there are sports with very few spectators (or even none) like skydiving.
For an advantage player there is at least one spectator (himself). He gets entertanined (or gets a service or whatever you want to call it) by playing a winning game. So there is at least value for himself.
That definetely describes my position. I go to a casino not just to play a Positive EV game and win but also getting entertained in the process of beating them at there own game. For me playing a negative EV game has zero eneratainmet value and the anticipation of short term win in a negative expectation game has zero entertainment value.
A professional sporstman also creates value.
On a similar way to a professional sportsman, an advantage player creates value.
But you might say that people go to see the sportsman and they pay to get entertained, that's where the value comes from.
Well there are sports with very few spectators (or even none) like skydiving.
For an advantage player there is at least one spectator (himself). He gets entertanined (or gets a service or whatever you want to call it) by playing a winning game. So there is at least value for himself.
That definetely describes my position. I go to a casino not just to play a Positive EV game and win but also getting entertained in the process of beating them at there own game. For me playing a negative EV game has zero eneratainmet value and the anticipation of short term win in a negative expectation game has zero entertainment value.
October 18th, 2012 at 7:15:24 AM
permalink
Value is created when you create something or improve on something. Value is not created when money is spent.
I spend $10 to get a hair cut from barber. The barber has created a value of $10. I have not created any value.
I buy a $10 bread from a baker. Assume the ingredients cost $4, then the baker has created a value of $6. I have not created any value.
I count cards for an hour and wins $10. Now you can look at it in 2 ways:
1st: I created $10 value for myself. The casino somehow destroyed its value by $10.
2nd: No value is created. I simply transferred the asset from casino to me.
Either way, the society as a whole gained no net value. And the society (excluding the AP) loses value.
>>> For an advantage player there is at least one spectator (himself). He gets entertanined (or gets a service or whatever you want to call it) by playing a winning game. So there is at least value for himself.
Using my example above: I created $10 + $1 (entertainment) for myself. The casino somehow destroyed its value by $10.
In this case, the society as a whole gained $1. But the society (excluding the AP) is still worse off.
Put it another way, the world (excluding AP) is better off if the AP drops dead ...
I am an AP but I feel quite comfortable knowing my existence causes everyone else a little worse off.
Why? because it is fair game to follow your self interest. It just so happens for me it is AP, for my neighbor it is honest work. I am sure my neighbor will switch to AP if it is in his self interest to do so.
I spend $10 to get a hair cut from barber. The barber has created a value of $10. I have not created any value.
I buy a $10 bread from a baker. Assume the ingredients cost $4, then the baker has created a value of $6. I have not created any value.
I count cards for an hour and wins $10. Now you can look at it in 2 ways:
1st: I created $10 value for myself. The casino somehow destroyed its value by $10.
2nd: No value is created. I simply transferred the asset from casino to me.
Either way, the society as a whole gained no net value. And the society (excluding the AP) loses value.
>>> For an advantage player there is at least one spectator (himself). He gets entertanined (or gets a service or whatever you want to call it) by playing a winning game. So there is at least value for himself.
Using my example above: I created $10 + $1 (entertainment) for myself. The casino somehow destroyed its value by $10.
In this case, the society as a whole gained $1. But the society (excluding the AP) is still worse off.
Put it another way, the world (excluding AP) is better off if the AP drops dead ...
I am an AP but I feel quite comfortable knowing my existence causes everyone else a little worse off.
Why? because it is fair game to follow your self interest. It just so happens for me it is AP, for my neighbor it is honest work. I am sure my neighbor will switch to AP if it is in his self interest to do so.
October 18th, 2012 at 11:07:23 AM
permalink
Quote: newbie49V
I am an AP but I feel quite comfortable knowing my existence causes everyone else a little worse off.
Horsepucky. If you think that, then everyone
is worse off because casinos exist. You can't
take all this subjective nonsense and make
concrete conclusions from it.
Someone hits a tree with his car and dies.
Thats bad. An ambulance comes and takes
the body away and gets paid for doing it.
Thats good. The cops call the family and
they're upset. Thats bad. The fam calls a
mortuary and pays for a funeral. For the
mortuary, this is good.
You can go on like this forever. Was the guy
hitting the tree bad? Who knows, its depends
where you are in the chain.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 3:12:19 PM
permalink
Assume a world with only 1 farmer and 1 fisher:
The farmer produces 10 bread per day.
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The farmer and the fisher exchange 5 bread for 5 fishes daily. Because they are willing to exchange, that means they are better off with a fixture of goods rather than to have only 1 good. The fisher prefers the farmer alive because then he can trade.
Assume a world with only 1 farmer and 1 fisher:
The farmer produces 10 bread per day.
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The fisher will not trade any fish for bread.
Then fisher don't care whether the farmer is alive or dead.
Assume a world with only 1 AP and 1 fisher:
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The AP takes 2 fish from the fisher per day.
Obviously the fisher prefers the AP dead.
Assume a world with only 1 AP and 1 fisher:
The fisher produces 10 fishes per day.
The AP takes 2 fish from the fisher per day.
The AP also tell jokes to the fisher.
Then it is up to the fisher, whether the jokes are worth 2 fish.
The difference between farmer and AP is that: the AP does not create value, he only transfers it to himself. And that is not good for everybody else.
The farmer produces 10 bread per day.
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The farmer and the fisher exchange 5 bread for 5 fishes daily. Because they are willing to exchange, that means they are better off with a fixture of goods rather than to have only 1 good. The fisher prefers the farmer alive because then he can trade.
Assume a world with only 1 farmer and 1 fisher:
The farmer produces 10 bread per day.
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The fisher will not trade any fish for bread.
Then fisher don't care whether the farmer is alive or dead.
Assume a world with only 1 AP and 1 fisher:
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
The AP takes 2 fish from the fisher per day.
Obviously the fisher prefers the AP dead.
Assume a world with only 1 AP and 1 fisher:
The fisher produces 10 fishes per day.
The AP takes 2 fish from the fisher per day.
The AP also tell jokes to the fisher.
Then it is up to the fisher, whether the jokes are worth 2 fish.
The difference between farmer and AP is that: the AP does not create value, he only transfers it to himself. And that is not good for everybody else.
October 18th, 2012 at 3:33:11 PM
permalink
Quote: newbie49
The difference between farmer and AP is that:
The problem with your story is, the casino doesn't
produce anything, its takes money from people
in the same way the AP does, with a superior edge.
The casino and the AP are identical.
Please don't try and tell me the casino produces
entertainment. No it doesn't, if anything it produces
misery and anxiety.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 3:43:43 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobThe casino and the AP are identical.
I'll believe this when I see the receipt for your table, your cards, and your dealer.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 18th, 2012 at 3:52:45 PM
permalink
Assume a world with only 1 AP1(cc), 1 AP2(casino) and 1 fisher:
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
AP2 takes 4 fish from the fisher per day.
AP1 takes 2 fish from AP2 per day.
In this case, the fisher is not worse off. But neither is he better off because of AP1.
AP1 still creates no value.
The fisher produces 10 fish per day.
AP2 takes 4 fish from the fisher per day.
AP1 takes 2 fish from AP2 per day.
In this case, the fisher is not worse off. But neither is he better off because of AP1.
AP1 still creates no value.
October 18th, 2012 at 3:56:00 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoI'll believe this when I see the receipt for your table, your cards, and your dealer.
I can give you the receipt for the lab-top I bought to sim the game.
I can give you the receipt for the bus ticket I bought to travel to the casino.
I can give you the salary statement for my spotter/bp workers. (They didn't declare it to the government, but that is not my fault.)
October 18th, 2012 at 3:59:59 PM
permalink
Quote: newbie49Assume a world with only 1 AP1(cc), 1 AP2(casino) and 1 fisher:
Assume we're in the real world where the
casino takes a players money with a superior
edge and gives the player nothing in return except
a stomach ache. The AP then takes the money
from the casino with his superior edge and
gives the casino nothing in return except
a headache. Sounds like a wash to me.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 4:18:46 PM
permalink
Why do you insist the casino gives the players nothing, when this is manifestly false? People who know that they are losing in the long run come there to lose in the long run, and win in the short run. You don't understand this mindset, I know. You don't have to. It's not for you. The casino is clearly providing a service to some greedy obsessive-compulsives, who if not for casinos would only be playing in unenforceable, occasionally violent underground games and exorbitant state-run games. Or do you think every single one is an extremely bad AP? How many do you think hold the odds to be on their side?
In short, "it does not provide a service to me, therefore it does not provide a service, and is no different from my own swindle that also does not (in and of itself) provide a service."
What's the word I'm looking for...
Good. Now show me a video of the casino getting up and walking to those things and you're set.
In short, "it does not provide a service to me, therefore it does not provide a service, and is no different from my own swindle that also does not (in and of itself) provide a service."
What's the word I'm looking for...
Quote: newbie49I can give you the receipt for the lab-top I bought to sim the game.
I can give you the receipt for the bus ticket I bought to travel to the casino.
I can give you the salary statement for my spotter/bp workers. (They didn't declare it to the government, but that is not my fault.)
Good. Now show me a video of the casino getting up and walking to those things and you're set.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 18th, 2012 at 4:31:27 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoWhy do you insist the casino gives the players nothing,
The casino creates no value when it takes a
players money with it superior edge. In fact,
they create misery, unhappiness, anger. Only
a fool likes to lose, and everybody who goes
on a regular basis will gain no value from
the experience. The caisno knows this, so they
give us free drinks, or provide a service where
we can buy drinks. They give us a buffet and
restaurants, lots of flashing lights and a false
festive atmosphere. This is to fool us into
thinking they create value for taking our money.
And it must work because people go back again
and again for more. But then, people generally
have their heads stuck up their butts anyway,
why should this be any different.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 4:38:26 PM
permalink
Oh, no! They've been fooled into thinking they enjoy something! Can they not see how factually incorrect their enjoyment is?
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 18th, 2012 at 4:54:58 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoOh, no! They've been fooled into thinking they enjoy something!
No, they've been fooled into thinking they
get value for their lost money. Like comps.
They think they're getting something for
nothing.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 9:26:35 PM
permalink
I sincerely doubt most of them are at all fooled. They know, even including comps, the odds are against them. But whether they are or not, what does it matter? The casinos are still providing something - call it vice, call it fun, call it an addiction, call it what you will - that the public voluntarily, with full information available (even if they don't all use or believe it), partake in. Take them out of the picture, the game goes with it - and it's clearly in demand, because when that happens, underground versions almost inevitably pop up. What you "provide," the people who pay for it do everything within reason to avoid, and you do everything within reason not to let them. Theirs may be a bit dishonest, reading between the lines, but yours is nothing but dishonest; it's a pure con.
And you've pretty much admitted at this point the original point that APs are just con artists on the right side of the law (as many such artists are). Now you're just trying (badly) to claim you're thieves swindling thieves, plugging your ears and chanting to block out the obvious dissimilarities.
And you've pretty much admitted at this point the original point that APs are just con artists on the right side of the law (as many such artists are). Now you're just trying (badly) to claim you're thieves swindling thieves, plugging your ears and chanting to block out the obvious dissimilarities.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 18th, 2012 at 9:57:15 PM
permalink
Quote: 24BingoNow you're just trying (badly) to claim you're thieves swindling thieves,
Casinos aren't thieves, any more than AP's are thieves.
Quit trying to put the casino on some pedestal, and
AP's in the gutter. They're equal in every way.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 18th, 2012 at 11:19:01 PM
permalink
Pay scale.com and CNN just released a survey of professions
in which the workers think that they make the world a worse place.
Gaming dealer came in at #2....
worst jobs
They know they contribute nothing.
AP is a call of duty.
Moral? Value? Doubt?
I'm sleeping Iike a baby
in my manhattan condo.
Like a (casino) boss.
;)
in which the workers think that they make the world a worse place.
Gaming dealer came in at #2....
worst jobs
They know they contribute nothing.
AP is a call of duty.
Moral? Value? Doubt?
I'm sleeping Iike a baby
in my manhattan condo.
Like a (casino) boss.
;)
In a bet, there is a fool and a thief.
- Proverb.
October 19th, 2012 at 2:17:15 AM
permalink
Quote: WongBoPay scale.com and CNN just released a survey of professions
in which the workers think that they make the world a worse place.
Gaming dealer came in at #2....
Quote: The Article"They may feel they're making the world a worse place by taking money away from people who often can't afford to lose that money."
Nope. I believe in a thing called personal responsibility.
Quote: The Article
Nearly 18% of gaming dealers say their job makes the world a worse place and almost half said their job doesn't do anything to make the world a better place.
Wow, nearly 18% huh... I guess the other 82% agree that people are responsible for their own choices.
October 19th, 2012 at 11:12:56 AM
permalink
Quote: MonkeyMonkey
Wow, nearly 18% huh... I guess the other 82% agree that people are responsible for their own choices.
They weren't asked what they thought about the
players, they were asked about their jobs. I guess
they don't buy the 'we provide entertainment'
hogwash either.
Thats why dealer burnout is so high. You're doing
nothing to make the world a better place, you're
actually making it a sadder place. And you have to
put up with abusive players on top of it. Just about
every time I play, I think who would want a dealing
job if they had any other choice of employment.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 19th, 2012 at 11:33:51 AM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobThey weren't asked what they thought about the
players, they were asked about their jobs.
After witnessing your stubborn refusal to "get it" in the other thread about creating value I'm not going to bother with you past this one reply.
Quote: EvenBob
I guess
they don't buy the 'we provide entertainment'
hogwash either.
Maybe you're on to something, maybe that nearly 18% has the same view as you.
Quote: EvenBob
Thats why dealer burnout is so high.
18% is a pretty whooping figure.
Quote: EvenBob
You're doing
nothing to make the world a better place, you're
actually making it a sadder place.
I disagree. I think it depends on what part of the "world" you're looking at. It's subjective and a matter of perspective. Here's a thought: if you don't like the evil casino, don't go. Take some responsibility for your decisions and stop whining.
Quote: EvenBob
And you have to
put up with abusive players on top of it. Just about
every time I play, I think who would want a dealing
job if they had any other choice of employment.
Abusive players make me laugh, the challenge is to not laugh in their face. Yup, tough job.
Anyway, knock yourself out with your reply, you're certain to get the last word, because I won't bother reading anything else you put in this thread.
October 19th, 2012 at 11:47:13 AM
permalink
Quote: MonkeyMonkeyAfter witnessing your stubborn refusal to "get it" in the other thread about creating value I'm not going to bother with you past this one reply.
What I 'get' is these dealers are making my point
exactly. 18% say they make the world worse, and
50% say they aren't doing anything to make it better.
Thats what I've been saying all along. Casinos are
leeches on society, even their own employees see it
that way. All an AP does is remove a little of the
leeches profit, nothing wrong with that. And I
guarantee if you polled AP's, none of them would
say they're making the world a worse place because
of what they do.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 19th, 2012 at 12:14:34 PM
permalink
And what's above that...?
Fast food employees.
Would you argue that fast food restaurants also don't provide anything? What they provide is toxic and unnecessary, yes, but it's in demand, with even most bakeries having branched out into what might be considered "fast food." What you provide is not at all in demand.
Again, the casinos' job isn't to play the game. They do hire people to robotically play a few games with a distinct banker advantage, but that's not what their business is. Their business is to facilitate gambling, and providing people to play slightly losing games "against" is just one way in which they do this.
It's not some new "line," either. Do you think that when an innkeeper in the Old West hired a faro dealer, the customers thought he was giving them free money? They knew that dealer was paid by their aggregate losses. They just hoped to get lucky.
AP, granted, is quite a venial misdeed, but don't pretend it's anything more, especially not if such grift is your living.
Fast food employees.
Would you argue that fast food restaurants also don't provide anything? What they provide is toxic and unnecessary, yes, but it's in demand, with even most bakeries having branched out into what might be considered "fast food." What you provide is not at all in demand.
Again, the casinos' job isn't to play the game. They do hire people to robotically play a few games with a distinct banker advantage, but that's not what their business is. Their business is to facilitate gambling, and providing people to play slightly losing games "against" is just one way in which they do this.
It's not some new "line," either. Do you think that when an innkeeper in the Old West hired a faro dealer, the customers thought he was giving them free money? They knew that dealer was paid by their aggregate losses. They just hoped to get lucky.
AP, granted, is quite a venial misdeed, but don't pretend it's anything more, especially not if such grift is your living.
The trick to poker is learning not to beat yourself up for your mistakes too much, and certainly not too little, but just the right amount.
October 19th, 2012 at 12:57:25 PM
permalink
Quote: 24Bingo
AP, granted, is quite a venial misdeed,
Its not any better or worse than what the
casino does. How is beating the casino
at its own game a 'misdeed'. The casino
has the edge and says, here, play this,
I dare you. The AP has his own edge and
says, no thanks, I have have a better idea.
Turn about is fair play.
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
October 19th, 2012 at 1:15:32 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobThe problem with your story is, the casino doesn't
produce anything, its takes money from people
in the same way the AP does, with a superior edge.
The casino and the AP are identical.
Please don't try and tell me the casino produces
entertainment. No it doesn't, if anything it produces
misery and anxiety.
If this is your opinion then fine, stay out of the casino and you will be better off. The fact that people are willing to go to a casino (hell, they get excited to go to the casino!) and they understand that they are not being forced into gambling or defrauded in any way proves that, for these people, the casino has created value.
Vote for Nobody 2020!
October 19th, 2012 at 1:17:27 PM
permalink
Quote: EvenBobAssume we're in the real world where the
casino takes a players money with a superior
edge and gives the player nothing in return except
a stomach ache. The AP then takes the money
from the casino with his superior edge and
gives the casino nothing in return except
a headache. Sounds like a wash to me.
Sounds like a casino that would fail, doesn't it? This is not what casino's do.
http://www.youtube.com/embed/dV1HSscPYSY
How can you argue that the casino is not creating value for these guys?
Vote for Nobody 2020!
October 19th, 2012 at 1:45:45 PM
permalink
Quote: bigfoot66If this is your opinion then fine, stay out of the casino and you will be better off.
LOL, that's what I said.
