Topic: $5 lost by a poor gambler is worth to him than $1K lost by a rich gambler - page 8. (Read 1539 times)

No gambler wants to lose they definitely want to win if they play gambling, and another thing is that the amount is important for poor people because it can be their needs even if it's only $5 so I think it's more not to force it if the little money is valuable.
The rich of course $1000 won't mind they can even afford to lose more money but that's in terms of the financial capabilities that are owned of course the rich and poor are far different in terms of their finances.

Poor people are too pushy, if $5 is valuable use more important things than gambling.
Rich people have fun in gambling, they are here to spend a lot of money sometimes they don't care about their addiction.

if both players are in the mood to lose, then the amount is not so important. The only point is how hard it was to earn this money, if for player (1) the amount of 5 dollars significantly impacts his monthly budget, then it may not be worth spending it on gambling. For player 2 for which 1 thousand dollars is not significant, the loss will be felt only over a long distance, at the moment when player 1 will feel it instantly. Comfort of life is an interesting indicator.

Like we kept discussing on other boards that Bitcoin trading or investment is not a convenient sector for an individual who does not have a source of income to invest their funds on otherwise, when they are in need of money, their Bitcoin assets becomes the only hope for them and the will be push to sell without undermining if profited or lost.

This is equivalent in gambling, we have as much discussed about gambling not being a good approach to rely on for source of income but a place to bet and gaming for funs but prettily potential to be profited if lucky to win more than the values of your stakes or even losts.

We have heard several stories of how gamblers has been financially and mentally affected at the course of addiction and loosing more than being afford simply because they are primarily aiming to make profits.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.
There in, I am convinced that the poor takes the lead because if we are to gamble with with is affordable to loose, the poor may actually not find the least stake of their $5 affordable to loose but yet they risks it on gambling. What for? Of course it is aimed to profit in returns and when they looses it, they goes frustrated and timely empty handed looking other means of raising as little to come back and keep trying again if they could win. Their major concern is to win and profit and never find fun as they play.

As for the riches tending to gambling for profits, even if they looses $1K + such as we have Drake has been, he actually don't feel so disappointed of the lost why? Because he has more and could afford so even while gambling for profits, they are not much financially or emotionally affected as the poor who can not afford the least lost on gambling.

Agreeably, some rich addicted gamblers do go bankrupts too but it takes processes to be drained they could loss but feels some fun expressions because they have more and could afford the lost at the moments but the poor start to feel drained at their first lost meaning gambling for profit is not a game for the poor else or even the inability to pull out when they are financially being affected.
In all, gambling without sustainabilities of income as you stick to gamble is not just a good place for anyone who is after making profit.

So since we can not make personal decisions for our fellow gamblers who had lost their prides in chasing the profits on gambling, let keep advocating for carefulness even while compromising the concept of gambling as a game of fun and not to be enriched.

Gambling isn't for profit, instead it's for entertainment. If you not feel happy or fun doing that, gambling isn't for you, as simple as that.

Of course the rich and the poor had different "threshold", that's why we need to calculate the money not only in amount, but in percentage too. That's why money management exist.

It's like saying someone must avoid gambling, travelling, going to cinemas etc because it's wasting money. I wonder how can someone be happy with such very strict life when they can afford that.

TLDR

Don't use the phrase "the rich and the poor" for comparison, as it's easy to conclude that the poor are always wrong. I mean, if you are poor, why would you gamble in the first place? Regardless of the amount, it's still going to hurt you because you are "poor." I think the proper phrase to use is "gamble what we can afford to lose." Regardless of our financial status, as long as we can afford to lose what we are gambling, we should have the same feeling whether we are rich or poor.

Money is precious; it doesn’t matter how much you lose. If it’s your hard-earned money, then definitely you will feel bad. Gambling is all about luck; hence, we need to make ourselves aware that if we gamble, then there is a high possibility of getting into losses. Hence, we need to take the risk accordingly and bet with the amount that we can afford to lose. Now regarding poor and rich, if the gambler is rich, then I don’t think he does gambling in a serious tone. According to me, a poor person gambles when there is a necessity of money, and on the other hand, a rich person gambles for the purpose of recreation.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.

If he is a poor person why should he gamble already knowing this is luck maybe he loses the $5 bet you said is more important, why do poor people gamble because they hope to change their fate after winning but you know this will not be easy it will only get worse if poor people insist on gambling especially when $5 can make food for him.

The rich person obviously still has a lot of sources of income, when he starts the pleasure of gambling and then loses it will not change their finances and can even recover again in the near future, but for the poor person he has to work hard to make a living for himself alone is difficult.

So do not force gambling if you are not willing to lose, even though the goal is for profit but it is not certain that you will win.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.
There in, I am convinced that the poor takes the lead because if we are to gamble with with is affordable to loose, the poor may actually not find the least stake of their $5 affordable to loose but yet they risks it on gambling. What for? Of course it is aimed to profit in returns and when they looses it, they goes frustrated and timely empty handed looking other means of raising as little to come back and keep trying again if they could win. Their major concern is to win and profit and never find fun as they play.

Like we kept discussing on other boards that Bitcoin trading or investment is not a convenient sector for an individual who does not have a source of income to invest their funds on otherwise, when they are in need of money, their Bitcoin assets becomes the only hope for them and the will be push to sell without undermining if profited or lost.

$5 lost by a poor gambler is worth to him than $1K lost by a rich gambler

I don’t think poor people should bet their money on gambling just because it is not unnecessary or in no way shape or form the right thing to be putting money on. People who have money gamble because they probably have a lot or they just want to entertain themselves but when you are poor, it is better for the necessities in life like food or anything like that.

Like we kept discussing on other boards that Bitcoin trading or investment is not a convenient sector for an individual who does not have a source of income to invest their funds on otherwise, when they are in need of money, their Bitcoin assets becomes the only hope for them and the will be push to sell without undermining if profited or lost.

This is equivalent in gambling, we have as much discussed about gambling not being a good approach to rely on for source of income but a place to bet and gaming for funs but prettily potential to be profited if lucky to win more than the values of your stakes or even losts.

We have heard several stories of how gamblers has been financially and mentally affected at the course of addiction and loosing more than being afford simply because they are primarily aiming to make profits.

So I am trying to pick some statics to understand between the poor and the rich who gambles more for profit.
There in, I am convinced that the poor takes the lead because if we are to gamble with with is affordable to loose, the poor may actually not find the least stake of their $5 affordable to loose but yet they risks it on gambling. What for? Of course it is aimed to profit in returns and when they looses it, they goes frustrated and timely empty handed looking other means of raising as little to come back and keep trying again if they could win. Their major concern is to win and profit and never find fun as they play.

As for the riches tending to gambling for profits, even if they looses $1K + such as we have Drake has been, he actually don't feel so disappointed of the lost why? Because he has more and could afford so even while gambling for profits, they are not much financially or emotionally affected as the poor who can not afford the least lost on gambling.

Agreeably, some rich addicted gamblers do go bankrupts too but it takes processes to be drained they could loss but feels some fun expressions because they have more and could afford the lost at the moments but the poor start to feel drained at their first lost meaning gambling for profit is not a game for the poor else or even the inability to pull out when they are financially being affected.
In all, gambling without sustainabilities of income as you stick to gamble is not just a good place for anyone who is after making profit.

So since we can not make personal decisions for our fellow gamblers who had lost their prides in chasing the profits on gambling, let keep advocating for carefulness even while compromising the concept of gambling as a game of fun and not to be enriched.

snip