Is poker Capitalist or Anti-Capitalist?

Is poker Capitalist or Anti-Capitalist (in principle)

I have pondered this question recently, yet am pretty stumped as to the answer.

My answer is that poker is capitalist, while gambling is anti-capitalist.

This could be a completely idiotic answer and extremely obvious to some of you but I would like to hear what you think.

How do you define "capitalist?"

As the opposite of Communism I would think where you share the wealth equally. Capitalism would then be the right of the individual to make as much profit as he or she can using the market economy to their advantage?

'Capitalism generally refers to an economic system in which the means of production are all or mostly privately[1][2] owned and operated for profit, and in which investments, distribution, income, production and pricing of goods and services are determined through the operation of a market economy. It is usually considered to involve the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as legal persons'

Capitalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whoops I can't believe I didn't specify that... I must be tired 5 oclock in the morning here...

I realize here I DEFINATELY used the incorrect word here... Capitalism has to do with the means of production. I should have said: does poker correspond to the ideals of the notion of the American Dream? i.e. hard work will in turn lead to success...

Damn I wish i could change the title of the thread...

Why is it always the 'American Dream'? most democratic countries around the world have just the same idea

A quick thought though - which is the more capitalist? Poker or Monopoly

Monopoly for sure. Especially if you steal from the bank

if your comparing poker to life, then yes its sorta simalur in many ways. There is however alot more luck involved in the game then in trying to lead a normal happy life. I mean its not like your gonna be sitting in the bank working out a mortgage then BAM! the ****er sucks out on you on the river!

im baked

You kidding me? Luck can be the difference between being born into a family with someone like Bill Gates as your father and being born into a family where putting food on the table is a problem (or that can't even afford a table, or a house). There's luck in the connections you're able to make, your natural abilities, but again like poker, the major factor is how hard you work and how good you can get. Sure a lazy bum with trillions of dollars could walk up to a poker table and get lucky and win a few thousand bucks. But over the long run, the person who's worked the hardest and gotten the best is the one who wins the money.

Note that luck also has a role in the bankroll you start out with. I'm in college and got all my poker money from a job (and then poker when I had the starting money). Another guy I play with says his parents send him $1,000 every month. Some are going to be better off than others, but even if you have little, if you're willing to put in an effort, I think it's possible for most people to become good at poker. The problem is people see it on TV and don't think they have to work for it. Just like all the musicians and athletes who drop out of school before they realize they can't make it, the same thing can happen with poker. It's not easy, and it takes work. I think it fits perfectly into the American dream.

I think poker is the American Dream, lots of money with little work

lol, please show me anyone making lots of money in poker without having put in any work.

Yes you are right of course, most capitalist (ic???) societies base their economy on the notion of hard work leading to success. I agree with you on the critique of the idea, but I just used the term for convenience.

As a libertarian myself, (don't judge please :] ) the idea of playing poker for a living appeals to me - being my own boss, working my own hours, under my own authority, etc... Unfortunately even poker players still have to answer to the damned IRS! . But my goal in life is to be happy, and poker seems like a good way to make enough money to not have to work in an office and find something I love. I am still very young (legal) though so I have some time to figure out what I want to do. But conversely I think the argument could be made that poker is just like any other job - you study a lot, practice a lot, and work hard at the tables and you will make money. So in this way it is pretty similar to the ideals of the "Capitalist Dream" (yeah copyright that ishhhhh.) I think the notion of luck though goes against the dream. Thoughts???

I think monopoly would be more capitalist haha. So at least I am not attempting (will be attempting) to play monopoly for a living

Quick side note just so I can say this someone on this site... My name ("I would prefer not to") is a quote from Melville's Bartleby the Scrivener, an anti-capitalist short story. Pretty cool aye?

LOL yes yes exactly. The luck factor in poker is against the "Capitalist Dream."

As somebody pointed out, luck is present in our everyday lives...

But as in the Great Gatsby (random, yes?), even hard work and an arduous pursuit of the Capitalist Dream won't always lead you to success...

So in this sense i would think that poker is similar to life, but not the Capitalist Dream.

Luck is part of capitalism. About two thirds of products introduced by major corporations don't make it! Poker looks deterministic in comparision.

If you play poker for fun(whether you are winning or losing), then poker sites are no different than cinemas, TV stations, or any other form of entertainment.

If you play poker for a living, then it is similar to playing the stock market or trading options on futures.

As far as being your own boss, that can be achieved by starting your own business and working from home.

I don't see poker as any more or less "capitalistic".

I would have to disagree.

Wouldn't most people believe that playing the game of poker isn't "work"? Even if it IS, real work isn't nearly as fun. Do you look at your paycheck the same way you look at the check from Bodog or Stars? I don't.

Ask Jerry Yang if it was work to make $8 million in what, four days? He had only started playing two months prior, and it was the only event he entered too!

If you want to take the words "any", "lots", or "work" literally, then you might be right, but they're surely subjective in our "American Dream" generalized scenario.

Communists believe that their system gets the most wealth to the people who work the hardest, too.

What the OP is really asking is if poker is meritocratic, which the answer is obviously yes.

Honestly, I think most real jobs are more work than grinding it out at poker for years. Sure if you cash in a major tournament you probably made enough to say that you made a ton of money without a lot of (comparative) work. But for anyone grinding it out in cash games or lower stakes tournaments, it's real work. It may not be as much physical labor as other jobs but it's definitely more more taxing on the mind.

My friend that goes to another college and plays poker has made about $20,000 in the last 2 years in college from poker. This is along with school along with college life. He's not grinding it out day in and day out. It's basically a hobby for him and the money's just a bonus. Now we were talking about the possibility of going pro. He said he thought (and I think he could) he could make 50k a year on poker if he did it primarily. But first off 50k a year is not a lot of money, with a good college education he'll probably get a starting salary above that, and it'll go up as he works. Secondly, as mentioned, poker is not easy. To play for that long that many days out of the year is taxing on your brain. The down swings would be hell, and I don't know if I could do it.

Sure the big name pros have it easy now, but you don't think they had to work hard to get to where they are now? You think Phil Ivey just woke up one day being able to play like he does?

And then of course there are the lotto winners, the ones who got lucky and won a huge prize in a tournaments. THOSE people are the ones who got lucky. For Jamie Gold I don't know how much work poker really was. But you think the Ngreaneus, the Iveys, the Cunninghams got to where they are now just by sitting back on their asses and watching poker on TV? And the online pros? Those guys are just amazing. I don't think I could do it. I think a job I get out of college will be easier money than poker is, but I still like poker and am going to work as much as I can to be as good as I can, and hopefully I'll get good enough so that it can be a good supplementary income. Right now it's good, gives me some spending money for college, but I'm only making around $200 a month, which although not horrible, is nothing compared with a real full-time job. And I've had to work to get to where I am now, and I still basically have to quit after a few horrible beats in a row to avoid tilt (which is progress, at least now I can get myself to leave and avoid it). I can only imagine how much work the pros had to put in to get that far.

Poker is the hardest way to make easy money.

Yes this is what i was (poorly) attempting to ask!

Some interesting arguments both ways on the meritocracy of poker as compared to an everyday job like trading stocks or investing.

Very interesting...