+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 8 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 120

Thread: How About Socialist Blackjack?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7

    Default How About Socialist Blackjack?

    With all the fear mongering about America becoming a Socialist State, I propose a new variation of Blackjack called Socialist blackjack. Each Player gets two cards. A community card is dealt. Players then make the best blackjack hand. If one wins, all lose and and he is taken out back and shot.

    Kind of lame. The idea came to me today. Last night the dealer had an issue with the shoe. A card became difficult and struggled to get out of the box. It happened again. Both times it was a Ace.

    It's slightly different than Community Blackjack...
    Last edited by Leaveawinner; December 29th, 2009 at 03:04 AM.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Leaveawinner View Post
    With all the fear mongering about America becoming a Socialist State, I propose a new variation of Blackjack called Socialist blackjack. Each Player gets two cards. A community card is dealt. Players then make the best blackjack hand. If one wins, all lose and and he is taken out back and shot.

    Kind of lame. The idea came to me today. Last night the dealer had an issue with the shoe. A card became difficult and struggled to get out of the box. It happened again. Both times it was a Ace.

    It's slightly different than Community Blackjack...
    This would be the way Socialist BJ would have to be played: Everyone makes their bet and plays their hand. The dealer combines the chips remaining on the table after each round, takes a 10% vig, and distributes the rest evenly among the players.

    It's a great game, if you are a $10 better at a table full of whales. Not so good for the whales, so of course they will leave, then you have to put up a wall around the table to keep them in. Eventually they run out of money, and the game becomes lousy for the $10 betters too, and they get angry, so with all the money the casino makes they hire some armed security to keep them in check. They don't have to play, but they can't leave either.

    Meanwhile back in the dealers' break room, every imaginable luxury and excess is to be found and enjoyed, paid for with revenues collected at the Socialist BJ table. There are many dealers, and they spend most of their time in the break room, each coming out for short periods to work the tables and give lectures to the players about being a good socialist.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In Bound
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey View Post
    This would be the way Socialist BJ would have to be played: Everyone makes their bet and plays their hand. The dealer combines the chips remaining on the table after each round, takes a 10% vig, and distributes the rest evenly among the players.

    It's a great game, if you are a $10 better at a table full of whales. Not so good for the whales, so of course they will leave, then you have to put up a wall around the table to keep them in. Eventually they run out of money, and the game becomes lousy for the $10 betters too, and they get angry, so with all the money the casino makes they hire some armed security to keep them in check. They don't have to play, but they can't leave either.

    Meanwhile back in the dealers' break room, every imaginable luxury and excess is to be found and enjoyed, paid for with revenues collected at the Socialist BJ table. There are many dealers, and they spend most of their time in the break room, each coming out for short periods to work the tables and give lectures to the players about being a good socialist.
    I think I'm already playing that game.
    There Is No Second Place Winner ...even if your not brusque and merely informative.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    1,459

    Default Am

    Quote Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey View Post
    This would be the way Socialist BJ would have to be played: Everyone makes their bet and plays their hand. The dealer combines the chips remaining on the table after each round, takes a 10% vig, and distributes the rest evenly among the players.

    It's a great game, if you are a $10 better at a table full of whales. Not so good for the whales, so of course they will leave, then you have to put up a wall around the table to keep them in. Eventually they run out of money, and the game becomes lousy for the $10 betters too, and they get angry, so with all the money the casino makes they hire some armed security to keep them in check. They don't have to play, but they can't leave either.

    Meanwhile back in the dealers' break room, every imaginable luxury and excess is to be found and enjoyed, paid for with revenues collected at the Socialist BJ table. There are many dealers, and they spend most of their time in the break room, each coming out for short periods to work the tables and give lectures to the players about being a good socialist.

    Good Job!

    CP
    "Midwest Masters Of Advantage", "Strength and Honor."

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8

    Default



    In Democracy Blackjack the table votes on each play. Guess you won't be hitting that 12 vs 4 after all!

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey View Post
    This would be the way Socialist BJ would have to be played: Everyone makes their bet and plays their hand. The dealer combines the chips remaining on the table after each round, takes a 10% vig, and distributes the rest evenly among the players.

    It's a great game, if you are a $10 better at a table full of whales. Not so good for the whales, so of course they will leave, then you have to put up a wall around the table to keep them in. Eventually they run out of money, and the game becomes lousy for the $10 betters too, and they get angry, so with all the money the casino makes they hire some armed security to keep them in check. They don't have to play, but they can't leave either.

    Meanwhile back in the dealers' break room, every imaginable luxury and excess is to be found and enjoyed, paid for with revenues collected at the Socialist BJ table. There are many dealers, and they spend most of their time in the break room, each coming out for short periods to work the tables and give lectures to the players about being a good socialist.
    I love it! Almost fascist blackjack.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    On the high seas
    Posts
    607

    Default terrorist bj

    How about terrorist bj where everyone who gets a bj has to detonate themselves?
    " That we may meet in a better place after this!"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Tundra
    Posts
    54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by irobinson View Post
    I love it! Almost fascist blackjack.
    You do know that socialism and fascism are on completely opposite ends of the political spectrum, right?

    And for all you Republicans who are afraid of "socialism" just remember the socialized police force is what keeps poor liberal scum like me from robbing you of all your nice things. Remember, the poor outnumber the rich.

    To continue the analogy, would you want to play somewhere with no casino security, where a bunch of red chippers who just lost their money could gang up and forcibly take your stack of green or black?

    So before you wingnuts complain about being taxed of some of your income to help society, remember that what is good for society is typically good for the more affluent within that society as well. You get a fire department to protect your bigger houses. Maintained roads on which to drive your vehicles.

    Taxation for the benefit of the society that made your wealth possible is a small price to pay for affluence. If you don't like that, well, nobody is forcing you to be well off.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    1,347

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Efficacy View Post
    You do know that socialism and fascism are on completely opposite ends of the political spectrum, right?
    Not at all. Fascism is a form of socialism, which uses the hook "good of the state" instead of "good of the people." From the perspective of its victims, it's the same thing. They are both left wing systems because they emphasize state control instead of individual rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Efficacy View Post
    And for all you Republicans who are afraid of "socialism" just remember the socialized police force is what keeps poor liberal scum like me from robbing you of all your nice things. Remember, the poor outnumber the rich.

    To continue the analogy, would you want to play somewhere with no casino security, where a bunch of red chippers who just lost their money could gang up and forcibly take your stack of green or black?
    I'll take my chances with the ploppies. In a socialist system, the casino security people would just come and take my stack and give it to the losers. He who robs Peter to pay Paul can count of the support of Paul.


    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Efficacy View Post
    So before you wingnuts complain about being taxed of some of your income to help society, remember that what is good for society is typically good for the more affluent within that society as well. You get a fire department to protect your bigger houses. Maintained roads on which to drive your vehicles.

    Taxation for the benefit of the society that made your wealth possible is a small price to pay for affluence. If you don't like that, well, nobody is forcing you to be well off.
    And what does any of that have to do with socialism?

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blue Efficacy View Post
    To continue the analogy, would you want to play somewhere with no casino security....
    Great idea Blue! Let's call it BASQUEJACK.
    Harolds Club RENO OR BUST

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    On the high seas
    Posts
    607

    Default wingnuts vs wackjobs?

    So it's safe to assume that people who fight against undo goverment control are wingnuts? If we wanted to have goverment control every aspect of our lives from birth to death we would move to europe. That is the general trend of thinking there. How much of your individual rights are you ready to give up in order to feel secure. I would guess all of them from hearing some of the comments posted on this site. The best game would be Obama bj where the losers could blame the winners for them losing but that already happens.
    " That we may meet in a better place after this!"

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8

    Default

    Indeed both fascism and socialism are subsets of collectivism. I disagree that they are at opposite ends of the political spectrum - they both appear to me to be radical left wing ideologies, that put the rights of the state before the rights of the individual. There seem to be many similiarities between the national socialism (fascism) of germany in the 1940's and the international socialism (communism) of Russia during the same time period.

    Fascism is generally used in political parlance as a derogatory slur towards policies one doesn't understand but disagrees with. To me fascism means the merging of state and corporate interests - jackboots not withstanding. Price controls (as issued in the states under Kennedy and Nixon) are an example of economic fascism.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    819

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Meistro View Post
    Indeed both fascism and socialism are subsets of collectivism. I disagree that they are at opposite ends of the political spectrum - they both appear to me to be radical left wing ideologies, that put the rights of the state before the rights of the individual. There seem to be many similiarities between the national socialism (fascism) of germany in the 1940's and the international socialism (communism) of Russia during the same time period.

    Fascism is generally used in political parlance as a derogatory slur towards policies one doesn't understand but disagrees with. To me fascism means the merging of state and corporate interests - jackboots not withstanding. Price controls (as issued in the states under Kennedy and Nixon) are an example of economic fascism.
    Hitler and the Nazi's were far right, not left. Their biggest enemy was the Communist Party. The Nazi's gave enormous power to corporations and had almost no regulation -- these are right-wing policies. In fact they were given free labor, no OSHA, no work rules, no unions, no child-labor laws -- the opposite of left-wing policies. German corps made massive profits under Hitler. Yes fascism means the merging of state and corporate interests. This is right-wing. In the extreme left theory, the government owns the means of production. But, there are no corporations in the normal sense. The operation of corporations is turned over to worker-councils. No stock, no massive profits, just big bureaucracies run "democratically" by the workers, but inefficiently and without innovation. Hitler and Mussolini certainly did not believe in this.

    In the 1940's, Stalin was no Communist. He was an authoritarian monster and would have embraced any economic system that kept him in total control. The Soviet Union was not very close to Marxist theory.
    My motto: "I hate to support casinos. But, I hate worse to libel anyone at anytime."

    Signature (ˈsig-nə-chu̇r) noun, from Latin signatus, A place where spammers add links...
    > Here's Qfit's: BJTF Free Resources

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    In Bound
    Posts
    478

    Default

    The common denominator of all the "isms" is too much concentration of power. Freedom does not tolerate "ism"
    There Is No Second Place Winner ...even if your not brusque and merely informative.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    819

    Default

    What about freedomism?

    Unfortunately, one man's tyranny is another man's freedom. Slave owners considered the end of slavery as taking away their freedom. Segregationists considered integration as taking away freedom.
    My motto: "I hate to support casinos. But, I hate worse to libel anyone at anytime."

    Signature (ˈsig-nə-chu̇r) noun, from Latin signatus, A place where spammers add links...
    > Here's Qfit's: BJTF Free Resources

+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. The Blackjack Professor.......Guaranteed Win at Blackjack series
    By MJOK in forum Voodoo & Unconfirmed Gambling Systems
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26th, 2016, 08:00 PM
  2. How the US Brought Down the Socialist Government Downunder
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 5th, 2015, 04:05 AM
  3. Replies: 22
    Last Post: May 13th, 2014, 07:11 PM
  4. $2 Blackjack
    By Katweezel in forum Anything Else But
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: December 8th, 2012, 01:54 AM
  5. Reject Obama and McCain! Support the socialist alternative in 2008!
    By zengrifter in forum ZenZone General Discussion
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: September 26th, 2008, 10:38 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts