| - DIHQ'S CELEBRITY BOXING POLL -> Here is an almost on topic question | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Here is an almost on topic question |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 19, 2004 Views: 602 | Here is an almost on topic question Dont know if any of you here have followed this story, but former Detroit Tiger & NY Yankee Cecil Fielder has gone through more than $47 MILLION in the past few years, principally because of gambling. The Fonz has changed his attitude toward gambling over the years; at one time I ageed with Ayn Rand and others that the only `rational` tax was the lottery. Hmmm Well, if one looks carefully, Fielder proves (along with Tyson) that it doesnt matter so much how much $$ you make but how much you keep. Yes, we all know that. But isn`t there something particularly disgusting with not recognizing that this form of ah...`gaming` is nothing more than masterbotory robbery, a self destruction that can be far, far worse than even hard drugs? I am almost to the point of agreeing with McMoron and others that pro rasslin is that much more agreeable than mainline sports in that no one in their right mind would dare bet on the stupid thing. Seems that gambling is truly a locomotive heading down the tracks here in America, in that we are taught from childhood that competition is healthy and YES, someones gonna lose, be it in a game, a business or ones ability to feed & clothe ones family. Kind of trite thinking, if you ask me, as we see Cecil moving outta his digs and onto the street. Something very wrong about the prnciple that `gambling` is an acceptable part of life cuz its `gaming`. Ah, gotta leave... Got a lotta $$ riding on the Sox tonight... atf |
| Posted By: Dionysus Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 583 | An interesting point you raise here ATF Its a real debating topic this. It is also interesting that you personally take this position as I would have thought you would have taken the opposing one based on your own beliefs of personal liberty and freedom of choice. Your experience and observations on this matter however seems to indicate in regards to gambling, the level of its self-destructive practises warrants a reproach, although I'm not sure what reproach you have in mind. An ethical reproach I think we have already as many oppose gambling (but many defend it too) or a more institutionalised reproach. You will have to elaborate to make that clear to me. Nevertheless, I do find your argument interesting and intriguing the way you have adopted this position as this issue does seem to resemble several other debates that can be summed up by the contention between personal liberty and societal protection. Look at similar debates on the gun issue, boxing, cigarettes, and over indulgent Battenberg intake... ;) I would guess our resident Anarchist Mr Legion would adopt an opposing view to the one your taking leaving people to make their own decisions on whether to waste a whole lot of money or not. Nevertheless, perhaps I am misunderstanding the finer points of what you are saying ATF. I prefer to put the higher virtue of the meaningful affirmation of existence above that of liberty and freedom, the latter two notions not always being compatible with the former and therefore being subordinant to it I would propose. Personal liberty and freedom can sometimes be utilised to debase existence and make it trivial, restrictive and mediocre, these default virtues I oppose un-analysed; they smell too heavy with the taint of commercial corporations that promote the advancement of artificial living within a self-destructive psuedo freedom. Interestingly enough the British government are currently taking a seemingly pro stance on gambling and creating a bill: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,11026,1331309,00.html I have a friend who gambles constantly on horses and sees it as a fine pursuit that he defends vigorously. My own thoughts, I am with you ATF, it is an addictive mugs game that has the possibility of ruining people's lives. Its funny my friend Jim every now and again phones me with 'a hot tip' 'a certain' and I never really do anything about it. However on one occasion I did take his advice, went up to the local betting office ('bookies' they're called in England) and placed a $19 bid on a horse.... it came second from last. I asked Jim "what was the point of doing that?" he replied, "It's the thrill of the gamble and the excitement of the race" I replied: "But I've lost $19, where's the fun in that? I could have had a few pints with that bought a pack of 24 Carslberg Export bottled lagers. Instead I blew it all and got nothing in return." He replied, you don't understand Dio, it's not an investment, it's a noble pursuit." I suppose it's personal opinion really, but I can't for the life of me understand the entertainment value of inputting £1000 and on average on getting back £200. I would feel stupid doing that. But the argument for betting people is all focused on the activity, the loss of money they see as identical to losing money when you purchase something like a TV, the potential of getting far more monetary reward back in return is the hook. However, in the end as you point out ATF, they are guaranteed to lose money. Seems to be about the activity then? Cheerio Dionysus |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 566 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Well, you certainly guessed right if you think old Legion would never gamble or buy lottery tickets and the like. The lottery is just another form of taxation levied against unrealistic hopes and dreams -'of being rich, against the millions to one odds') Gambling is the same. Lovers of money and shadow images on the wall, as Plato might say. Us philosopher kings are above such things, we have evolved beyond the need for such trivial self aggrandizement and mere superficialities. That is why everyone must be educated to be a philospher king - in his own right and his/her own way. Every man is an artist - let the machines do the work. Only then will we have true freedom. Consider: if there were NO cops, judges, lawyers, jailers, pig guards, etc, parasiting off 'the system'...if they all disappeared tomorrow, would OUR society fumble into archaic violence? No, of course not. Because we have been somewhat 'socialized' by our, admittedly inept, educational system. But still, people wouldn't suddenly go nuts shooting each other and running around like wild animals like 'FESTIVAL' time in the Star Trek episode with the 'Landrew' computer controlling everyone. Nope. Some people would. The criminals and parasites of society would still try to feed off the rest of us. But most people wouldn't, because most people are just like me. They know enough not to go around killing everybody and stealing their stuff. They had Moms and Dads to instruct them not to do that stuff. Trouble is, SOME countries in the world are NOT socialized enough. They are still in a primitive state of societal evolution, doing exactly what I said - running around shooting each other like animals. But that's okay. We got nukes. An 'army' is obsolete when you got nukes. (Maginot line) We could do Anarchy in our society, real easy. Those in power would never allow it, because that is how they derive their power, from fear. |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 565 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question You are quite correct in the assumption that I will have to take freedom & liberty over the nebulous effects of `existence`, though I have come to understand some points of view of the person who looks to protect & promote the `greater good`, for the weak are not always who they first appear to be. My sister, who could buy five like me is, sadly, a person who has gambled enough away to have bought my house AND car and had a little left over for a nestegg just on her LOSINGS. Something wrong there. My quandry is that I have to justify why it is somehow o.k. that a good guy like Cecil Fielder or a woman like my sister can SQUANDER hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars/pounds/pesos and thats all right...but a guy who injects or ingests thousands of dollars worth of drugs...well...thats disgusting! Huh?! Freedom brings about responsibility and its such a shame that someone like Fielder is going from the penthouse to the outhouse because he ignored or was ignorant of this platitude. Somehow, this is sad indeed. Do we really need a LAW for this? How about better education on this through actuarial tables of gambling? As someone once remarked to me: `Vegas wasnt built on letting the chumps win.` Or, as I once explained as to why I never smoked: `Im too cheap, too scared for my health and too afraid the bimbos wouldnt like the smell.` Fear can play an important and meaningful role in ones life, would you not agree? atf |
| Posted By: Dionysus Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 562 | Questions... First up for Legion: (1) Why do we all need to be 'Philosopher Kings'? I don't want everyone to be like me, Nietzsche wouldn't want that either, and Plato, where the term comes from, definitely wouldn't advocate that, but an anarchist, would he/she? I prefer more to think in terms of human types, not all are artists, many (the majority) would freely choose to work as their labour becomes their meaning. There are others where mental work produces meaning. I would guess the ubermenschen are more a type in minority than an ideal for everyone to try and strive for. (2) Why do you oppose the liberty of those who gamble. Should they not be given that freedom to choose for themselves what they want to do in thier lives? Now Fonzie: (1) A theme of your argument is the nonsensical throwing away of money and having nothing to show for it. So can you define the difference between (a) betting, and (b) being a season ticket holder and cable subscriber to spectate sports such as Baseball, American football, & basketball? Is it the higher cost in general, even though both only give in return the experience, (although at least betting gives some of the money back compared to spectating sports)? (2) How could America with its import and focus on personal bourgeois liberty and freedom consolidate a position on restricting its citizens from gambling, (for their own benefit)? (3) As I mentioned previously, I don't like betting, as I can't appreciate the 'pleasurable experience' of gambling. It feels more like dropping £10 notes into a river and watching them float away, sort of fun to watch, but really stupid. But should my personal view of this activity be seen as the norm to the detriment of the liberty of those who choose to gamble. Compare this to someone who opposes boxing due to its unecessary violence and physical detriment to those who box. Should their view be seen as the norm and boxing banned? Cheers Dionysus |
| Posted By: Bear Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 554 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Well it's nice to be back among you keyboard philosophers. Thanks to my son-in-law who spent several hours exorcising crippling viruses from my maching, I'm finally up and running after a few weeks of enduring Dio withdrawal. Anyway, I thought I'd weigh in with a couple of points guaranteed to annoy ATF and Legion. My old buddy ATF wrote, "Do we really need a LAW for this? How about better education on this through actuarial tables of gambling?" You're assuming that people actually understand arithmetic. LOL LOL LOL I'd be willing to be that 50% of the American public doesn't know their times tables through 10. No kidding. Insofar as I believe that the medium is the message, I would predict that more edumacation on gambling would result in --- more gambling. Hey, look what sex ed did for teen pregnancy. Legion wrote that people wouldn't go around acting like animals if controls were lifted. I would like to extend a personal invitation to the leading Canuck anarchist to spend one day with me at the high school where I teach. I suggest only one day, because at the end of a week, you'd convert to Nazism. And you're more amusing the way you are. Cheers. |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 552 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Damn it all, you have me thinking again! First off: We are very close in our opinions here; neither of us likes the idea of a government ban nor do we like the notion of blowing our paychecks on something goofy like sports events. Secondly: I believe you have the correct perspective here, Dio, when you note that perhaps...just perhaps...some (many?) people find VALUE in gambling. Fair enough. My original point is not the goof who goes to Vegas and `blows` a couple hundred. No. My point is that there are people out there who are sick...I mean SICK...out and out full blown weirdazz sick to where they start off with millions and end up homeless. Yes, yes...these people are usually STUPID...but some may very well have a sickness/disease every bit as costly as drugs or alcohol. Why, prey tell, does the gummint restrict drugs, incarcerate junkies and have a `War on Drugs` while gambling is `cool?` Hey didnt say I had a solution, merely a question. Lastly, I believe Leege doesnt disagree with us so much as he feels he has better things to blow his money on (God only knows & I dont wanna...) And take those worn philosophy papers with you, Field Marshall, our resident Pied Piper is about to vent out his latest Plato like discourse. Im sure it will be a classic & no, he needs no coaching. atf |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 550 | RE: BEAR! WB.... When I mention `education` Bear, Im not so much talking about the current HS system wherein teachers give winks, students giggle and we all end up saying "Ah what the hell, theyre gonna do it anyway!" NO! What I need to explain to people is/..... well//// pretend Im talking to old Cecil, `k? Cecil...If you continue to GAMBLE you will be 1) Out of baseball ala Pete Rose 2) You will be out of a house & car, cuz the HOUSE ALWAYS WINS, Ceece...always... here, watch this movie called `Casino` 3) CF, if you gamble and lose...and you WILL LOSE...you will have no trim nor Acapulco Gold nor that California King Bed. 4) Mr. Fielder & children of all ages: If you gamble beyond a few bucks a week, no matter how rich you are.. YOU ARE STUPID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But yeah Bear, to do anything half way and p.c. will defeat the purposes of any kind of sermon to the chillin, to be sure. atf, welcoming committee chairman of the Bear Returns Reunion |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 549 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Yah, I know Plato and Fred wouldn't go for that. That's why they're boneheads. Plato and Socrates were from upper class, disadvantaged aristocracy, so that's what they advocated, a return to the good old days when their families were in charge. How convenient? Those bounders! We can achieve Plato's ideal Republic only NOW because we have eliminated the 'need' for slave labour and the 'need' for a violent underclass of warriors to defend us. Those classes are obsolete, by our technology. We don't need to toil in the fields to scratch enough food out of the ground to barely survive another year. But some people will. Believe it or not, some people like to be farmers. And those who love it, are really, really good at what they do. And isn't that the definition of 'self actualization'? We don't all have to be "like you" Just like ourselves. |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: Oct 20, 2004 Views: 548 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Oops, 2. Oh, I don't care what the morans do with their money. Blow it all on bling-bling for all I care...whatever that is? The only thing we should be giving heroin junkies is more heroin. Those tiny percentage of people who can't handle their "choose your poison" are going to find something to get addicted to and kill themselves with, let's face it. It doesn't matter what you ban, they'll find some glue to sniff/paint thinner to huff. That's just the way it is. Some people just cancel themselves out of the gene pool. Just like the rats in the dopamine study's that keep jolting themselves with cocaine until death. Some people just can't handle it, and they weren't meant too. Curse that Darwin! Cad! Phooey! Bear: I dunno, you've got a better view of it than I do. I've been really impressed with the kids at my local university though. They have kinda restored my faith in young folks, whom I used to think were all turning into a whole generation of brainless zombie morans. Hey, some of these snivelling twits are way more smarter than I was at that age, that's for sure. Smarmy little twits. The old grumpy cynical skeptical Leege has been very impressed. |
| Posted By: Bear Posted On: Oct 21, 2004 Views: 521 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Well ATF, thanks for the welcome back. The point I'd like to make about the Fielders and the Roses of the world is that they don't understand odds. Remember, these guys have already beaten extraordinary odds to make it in professional sports. I mean 1 in 10,000 athletes makes it to the pro level. So to them, the law of averages just doesn't apply to their life experience. Trying to convince them otherwise just doesn't compute with them. Second point: A lot of an athlete's income should be deferred and put into some kind of trust. But it takes an intelligent, competent and responsible agent to that for his client. Problem is: There are a lot of dumb agents (and I really DO mean dumb), and dumb players hire dumb agents. Get the point? Honestly, I know several agents who can barely utter a complete sentence, let along write one. In regard to Legion, I'm glad that you're impressed with the young people with whom you've come in contact. Remember, however if they're attending a university they probably represent (at least) the top 15% of their age group. I'm fortunate to be teaching that group finally, and it's actually a lot of fun - and a lot of work too. I have 120 essays to read this weekend and a game tomorrow night. But believe me, I'd rather do that than fight with a classroom full of nitwits who can't do anything, and I mean anything, except bother each other. Been there, done that. |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 22, 2004 Views: 513 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Hehe, ya I hear you Bear. Reason I`ve never been a cop is the same reason I`d never be a teacher: There would be fresh bodies in the desert every day. I swear I`d have to kill kids who pay me no attention. And I actually like kids, hehehe... Anyway, you are a better man than I Bear, you truly are. |
| Posted By: JSK Posted On: Oct 22, 2004 Views: 505 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question Wow Fonz I actually went to college (for a full year) studying law enforcement:) Would have been great if somehow(Kinda like Bear's averages 1 in 10,000)that we worked a beat together. I could just see it now ..... Fonz: Damn it J your friggin late! JSK: Oh whats a few minutes!?! Now lets go catch some bad guys! JSK runs towards the cop car and jumps across the hood. He slides ever so cooly to the other side and bolts his way into the drivers seat. (J lights up a smoke as Fonz looks at him in grief) Fonz: NO WAY ROOKIE ... I drive you navigate! J shrugs his shoulders and moves aside to the passenger seat as the Fonz enters the cop car. Fonz- And put that joint out! -------------- I'm sure you would have made a great cop Fonz actually a better and "cleaner" one than I. Maybe at the time I was just too young and still unclear of what I really wanted to do when I grew up? Some days I still wake up and ask myself that same question. Bear hats off to you man. I never realized how annoying even the hottest college chick can be at times. High school girls are even worse without even meaning to be. A few months back I had to attend a school function for business. From the second I walked into school I could tell things had changed, but didn't in some respects. First off all the dudes were dorky either wearing their baseball caps backwards or pants that fell to their knees. They were loud and semi unrulely. Just enough to annoy me and most others, but not the teachers. Somehow they shut them out only to tell them to be quite before they really got out of hand. But I noticed the patience with them. Almost like parenting 500 kids. But, then as soon as the teacher went up to speak it was like he or she would have a few seconds to capture them and pull them into the learning experience. Not just for the book smart aspects of it all ... for the inspirational point. I can count on one hand how many teachers really made a statement in my years of schooling. In some aspects its kinda sad to think some were only names, but those few that either made me really think or learn or just believe in something are the ones that counted.(My eyes are beginning to tear) I'm sure your a great teacher(actually I know you are) with humor mixed into your schedule. Again another job that some just have the nack for. I'm great with people and on that day I acted as professional as I could speaking for the kids. But, it felt more like beginners luck. I'm sure I would have ended up like that "Jack Black" guy in the movie school of rock. And thats not even a movie worth renting. Leege ... what are you sputtering!?! GO SOX- JSK |
| Posted By: legion Posted On: Oct 22, 2004 Views: 494 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question I dunno, I get a kick out of that Jack Black character. Thought that movie was pretty darn funny. Not the greatest, but better than most. That guy is a nutbar, and I relate to nutbars. Old Cecil sure did launch some towering blasts out of Tagir Stadium didn't he? 84 was great though, I was more of a sport fan then. Tram and Lou were vacuum cleaners, Morris was a machine - nobody could hit that forkball, Willie Hernandez, nobody could hit that screwball. Nobody. Those big hitters just waved at it going by. 68? I saw Denny McClain pitch, saw Mickey Lolich pitch, I was a kid and my Dad took me, but those are vivid in my memory. Good ole Taagir Staduim, as George Kell would say. |
| Posted By: atf Posted On: Oct 22, 2004 Views: 491 | RE: Here is an almost on topic question You guys hehe Killer, you might wanna know that my first Tiger game I saw the Tigs beat the Red Sox when Harvey Kueen drilled one into straight away center field. Leege, I havent been to a MLB game in years; not since their union became so strong. My gawd, it isnt exactly a battle of the overpass...its a stupid game played by millionaires!!! I used to be in electronics, killer. The idea of being a cop never appealed to me. See, when I was in my late teens all the local cops were draft dodgers. Anyway, when I got out I found few people wanted a lame armed, nearly blind smuck with nerve problems. Now, Im busy attempting to be rich while sucking off mama Murka. Hey, it works for Bush & Kerry! atf |
| Pages [ 1 2 ] Next Page -> |