Poker, Football and Economics

I'm the first to admit that I don't understand Economics. It seems to me that 90% of it is just a mechanism for separating idiots from their money (and of course I'd never be party to something like that). It often makes me think about a short story I read once, a science fiction thing, where robots made loads of stuff and everyone had to consume it, or else. One guy couldn't keep up so he made his robot consume it instead. They found out and he thought he was going to get the chair but everyone decided "great idea" so they got half the robots to make loads of stuff and the other half to consume it all. Sorted. The parallels are clear, lol.

Anyway, I had been meaning to post something on here for a while about whether playing poker was a productive occupation, to society in general. And I would probably have concluded, not really, but unless you're actually a doctor or a teacher then STFU because you're no better. But before I got around to it (i.e. sometime, ever) this came up on 2+2. The original question was "Being told that professional poker doesn't contribute to society - anyone have a good answer ?". About 20 posts in, "plzbenice" answered, and I quote : "theres no argument agaisnt it because theyre right. so? ty for your money dumbasses now i go snort coke from a bunch of silicontits, have fun at your job sucker." Which was, IMO, the 10/10 gold star correct answer, end of thread.

Then I was thinking about this again when I saw in BBC Sport's sort of paper round-up, the bare-faced statement that "If England fail to qualify for Euro 2008, it will cost the economy at least £1.25bn. ". Erm, what exactly does that mean ? If, as I suspect, it means that people aren't going to whack £1.25 bn on their credit cards to buy their kids crappy replica shirts made in a Chinese sweatshop [1], then to me that sounds pretty good for everyone except the sweatshop owners, and I figure screw them. This just goes back to the robots. If half of us are making tat in vile conditions and the other half are buying it when we don't really need it, is this "economic growth" or a complete waste of time ? Don't ask me, as Leftfield Lydon said, I don't know. And when it all comes down, I quote freely from the same source : don't blame me, I told you so.

[1] On further thought, maybe some of it was to account for rebuilding contracts on town centres after England lose to Germany on penalties.

The Rockingest Hemisphere Of Them All

I must admit to being more tense than I expected while listening to the closing stages of the rugby yesterday. Egg-chasing doesn't do a lot for me, it being the chosen form of physical torture employed at my school. What I love about it though is how many people are giving a shout out, not to their own club, not their own country, not even their own continent - no, let's hear it for the Northern Hemisphere ! The rockingest hemisphere of them all !

This really is taking the inclusive gang concept of international sport to the most ridiculous extreme. During Euro 2004, an Irish comic pointed out just how many "Old Enemies" we English actually have. Scotland, obv. Ireland, yes, the old enemy. France. Germany. Argentina. As he rightly observed, "Can't you fuckers get on with anybody ?". And yet now we're teaming up with all of these Old Enemies (well except Argentina), all in the name of that Hemisphere we love so much.

Despite our best efforts though, South Africa must still be favourites to take the trophy back to that evil smelly communist Southern Hemisphere. Hmmm. What we should do is get everyone together except one really wank country. The Faroe Islands maybe, oh no, hang on, they nearly beat Scotland once. How about American Samoa, no, they sound like they might be a bit handy at rugby. I don't know, fucking Andorra or someone. Let's all gang up together and pick on them. Then we'll be all the way back to the playground, which seems to be the whole point of international sport anyway.