The sound argument in favour of gambling is simple: it’s fun, and people enjoy it.
It’s not “rigged”, everyone involved understands the game. I hand over money, the house takes some, in return I get an enjoyable experience.
Personally online casino is a bit of a mystery to me, but I enjoy a visit to a real casino once or twice a year; it’s fun to sit at the roulette table pretending to be James Bond for an evening. An afternoon at a racecourse is a great day out, and betting on sports makes watching the event more fun. Hell, even Bingo can be fun with the right company.
I am capable of doing all those things without bankrupting myself because I am a perfectly normal person. That a few inadequates are not capable of that is not an argument for banning it for everyone, it’s an argument for having a properly regulated industry that protects idiots from themselves while allowing the vast majority to make their own decisions.
The house must always win, and that’s true as gambling empires have the games with “house edge” built in to make sure the odds are in their favor over the average gambler. This even includes online gambling where the odds aren’t really random but rather calculatedly more difficult to win bigger prizes.
Of course the odds are in the favour of the house, that’s how the house gets paid - that’s why theres a 0 on the Roulette wheel, to take the obvious example. Everybody understands this.
And of course the odds of winning a big prize are longer than the odds of winning a small one… That’s, well, obvious.
None of this is “rigged”, it’s the game. You haven’t discovered some dark secret, you’ve just understood “how casinos work” and the players understand it perfectly well too. (In well regulated markets the pay tables are published, audited, and available for anyone to view.)
I love doing heroin, it’s actually a wonderful and very safe drug if used responsibly. I like doing heroin once or twice per year and it’s actually way cheaper than a night at the bar, it’s definitely more enjoyable and it’s healthier too!
I don’t know why I, a responsible heroin user, should have to suffer just because a few loser degenerates can’t handle the needle.
I wasn’t being sarcastic. I am in favor of drug legalization, but with heavy regulation. My problem with drugs being illegal is that it then cannot be regulated.
I mean, many would say that treating people with heroine addiction is indeed better accomplished by giving them safe spaces to wean them off rather than criminalising them, yes.
But the American War on Drugs has been an unvarnished success, of course, so that’s obviously the best approach.
I do actually think that harm reduction is a better strategy than criminalization, so I’m not advocating for banning gambling outright. But I think that its dubious value as entertainment needs to be weighed against the harm that it causes, and that regulation should be put in place to address those harms efficiently.
Then we are in violent agreement. (I mean, I genuinely think gambling is fun, in moderation - so I probably wouldn’t say “dubious value”, but otherwise I agree 100%. Some people cannot enjoy it safely, and they should totally be protected by regulation.)
Yeah and I recognize that I’m the weird one who doesn’t enjoy gambling at all. I realize that lots of people, if not most, do find the lottery or some gambling to be fun, and I know that most people that do so are doing it responsibly and understand that on average, they’re losing money. Even if I don’t see the entertainment value for myself I have to accept that everyone is not like me.
Gambling is addictive and exploitative. A lot of effort goes into keeping players engaged, exploiting the pleasure response centers of the brain. It’s not just refined folk betting on horses, but gacha games, loot boxes, slot machines, prediction markets. Gritty and sleazy.
If your lucked out with your genes just be happy, and don’t call people with a high risk of addiction inadequate idiots.
“Exploiting the pleasure response centres of the brain” is pseudo-scientific twaddle for “a lot of effort goes into making it fun”.
Yes, yes it does. That’s a good thing.
And I didn’t “luck out” with my genes. They’re perfectly in line with the vast majority of people. That some people are cursed with inadequate faculties is a reason they should be protected (through regulation), not a reason for normal people to have their freedom curtailed.
We don’t ban movies because some people are blind.
Okay but the argument isn’t that gambling is bad. It’s that gambling ads and apps are. A gambling addict who gambles at a casino has to physically go to the casino and can only gamble as long as their body will allow them. Sure they can ruin their lives but there are physical unavoidable things that limit their gambling. To say nothing about the responsibility we’ve decided casinos have to address gambling addiction. A casino can kick a player out, sure they can go to another but that’s time they don’t spend gambling.
Gambling ads and apps are everywhere. They’re inescapable. An addict doesn’t have to physically go to a casino anymore. They can gamble wherever, whenever, on anything. If they try to pull themselves away the apps use push notifications to pull them in. Uninstall the apps, the ads are running everywhere all the time. Get banned, just make a new account. It takes minutes. The availability to gamble is just constant now.
If nothing else, ban gambling ads. It won’t stop people but it’ll let them escape the constant push to get back in.
I mean, an argument whose answer is “make all gambling” illegal - which is what we’re talking about here - clearly is founded on “all gambling is bad”.
Personally I’d agree with you about heavily curtailing, or even banning, advertising and sponsorship. And putting in place restrictions on amount wagered, loss limits, mandatory self exclusion registers etc. But all that is regulation, not an outright ban. (I’m not even particularly against a state monopoly tbh.)
Gambling is “very harmful” to a tiny minority of people who have a disorder. That is very sad for them, and they should be protected from themselves through proportionate regulation.
I’m quite sure - this being lemmy - that plenty here think the “War on Drugs” is absurd and has failed, and that responsible people who know their limits are being punished and forced into illegal markets because a few people are unable to control themselves. And they’d be right. All prohibition does is force ordinary people into black markets and everybody loses.
As for alcohol - that damages far more people than gambling ever will. Personally, I am sufficiently competent to simply not drink alcohol, but I understand many are not capable of that - but I nevertheless don’t advocate for prohibition.
The question is how many people are harmed/unharmed by gambling? If say 2% of all bettors develop a gambling addiction, does that warrant a complete ban? What if it was 0,5% ? I don’t know the actual numbers on this but I generally think that you shouldn’t illegalsize for the many what is a problem for a small minority. I watch hours upon hours of sports with betting ads and I have never engaged in betting because I’m self aware enough to know that I might not be able to handle it if I get of “to a good start”.
According to reputable sources (Lancet), around 1.5% of people engage in problematic gambling, with at-risk harder to estimate but probably around 8%. Compared to around 50% of people overall who participate in gambling perfectly happily (and the rest don’t engage at all.).
Interestingly, there is a high co-morbidity with substance abuse and alcoholism. So if it’s all about protecting those people, we need to ban alcohol as well (and win the war on drugs - haha.)
That’s what I’m saying. To me, 1,5% is way too few people that it warrants banning an activity that the vast majority can handle - even though the ads for gambling are through the roof. Just like alcohol. Take Norway, s country that is known for its very strict alcohol laws. According to https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/alcoholism-by-country (don’t know creditably), 1,59% suffer from alcoholism. Sweden is 2,81%.
However, it’s too different debates. My stand is that it’s all about proper relegation and education.
It’s not only about addiction. Gambling industry is very corrosive overall being a major source for money laundering, financial exploitation and source of conflict. Generally I’m very libertarian but gambling is just an incredibly toxic industry because it has so many invisible costs that is more than just addiction.
How are you sourcing these claims? I from a gambling friendly country and now live in one where gambling is illegal and the societal damage caused by gambling is very noticeable. Though, I’d say big chunk of it is coming from gambling advertisements and legal physical casinos with no advertisements allowed would be very fair compromise imo.
England of course has had a well regulated gambling environment for literally centuries, and regulated online for the best part of 30 years; in an unregulated/prohibition state, I’d expect the numbers for gambling to look worse. Because that’s what regulation does - it minimises harms.
Probibition does not minimise harms. The 1.5% who are serious problem gamblers will be on black market sites the next day, now with zero protection. The maybe 8% who are at-risk are much more likely to find themselves on a black market site with zero protection, and the remaining 50% who enjoyed gambling and were never harmed by it are the ones that lose out.
Brazil, for avoidance of doubt, did not have a well-regulated sector. I doubt - and I speak from direct experience - that there was a single operator in Brazil that didn’t have someone in the regulator on their payroll.
Brazil’s problem isn’t gambling, it’s corruption. This is just a sideshow.
A lot Christian fundies in here downvoting you. If we scratch a little more we might see how they actually feel about gay people and Dungeons & Dragons.
Lemmy has a deeply fucking weird vibe tbh. It’s like Karl Marx just stepped off the Mayflower. And I love the fact that it’s A Truth Universally Acknowledged that children should be allowed to use social media unimpeded (because Age Verification Is The State Surveilling You And Stealing Your Precious Bodily Fluids), and teens should be allowed to change their gender and take permanently life-altering drugs or surgery to do it (Because They Know Their Choices And Anyone Suggesting Otherwise Is An Oppressive Bourgeois Traitor Probably Trying To Steal Their Precious Bodily Fluids) but grown-ass adults can’t put a few quid on their team to win because They Are Vulnerable And Cannot Make Their Own Decisions Lest Their Precious Bodily Fluids Go To Waste Instead of the Collective. And God Forbid you suggest anyone with an entirely imagined Neurodivergent Condition (“OMG does anyone else go to sleep when they’re tired? I only understood this when I self diagnosed as autistic, normies could never understand”) be told what THEY are allowed to do because you’re just Oppressing Them FFS.
The sound argument in favour of gambling is simple: it’s fun, and people enjoy it.
It’s not “rigged”, everyone involved understands the game. I hand over money, the house takes some, in return I get an enjoyable experience.
Personally online casino is a bit of a mystery to me, but I enjoy a visit to a real casino once or twice a year; it’s fun to sit at the roulette table pretending to be James Bond for an evening. An afternoon at a racecourse is a great day out, and betting on sports makes watching the event more fun. Hell, even Bingo can be fun with the right company.
I am capable of doing all those things without bankrupting myself because I am a perfectly normal person. That a few inadequates are not capable of that is not an argument for banning it for everyone, it’s an argument for having a properly regulated industry that protects idiots from themselves while allowing the vast majority to make their own decisions.
The house must always win, and that’s true as gambling empires have the games with “house edge” built in to make sure the odds are in their favor over the average gambler. This even includes online gambling where the odds aren’t really random but rather calculatedly more difficult to win bigger prizes.
Of course the odds are in the favour of the house, that’s how the house gets paid - that’s why theres a 0 on the Roulette wheel, to take the obvious example. Everybody understands this.
And of course the odds of winning a big prize are longer than the odds of winning a small one… That’s, well, obvious.
None of this is “rigged”, it’s the game. You haven’t discovered some dark secret, you’ve just understood “how casinos work” and the players understand it perfectly well too. (In well regulated markets the pay tables are published, audited, and available for anyone to view.)
I love doing heroin, it’s actually a wonderful and very safe drug if used responsibly. I like doing heroin once or twice per year and it’s actually way cheaper than a night at the bar, it’s definitely more enjoyable and it’s healthier too!
I don’t know why I, a responsible heroin user, should have to suffer just because a few loser degenerates can’t handle the needle.
You’re being snarky but this is pretty much why drugs should legalized. Except without the Christian fundie judgy “loser degenerates” thing.
I think that your comment tracks unsarcastically. I could do without the name calling, but otherwise, do dope all you want and mind your own business.
I wasn’t being sarcastic. I am in favor of drug legalization, but with heavy regulation. My problem with drugs being illegal is that it then cannot be regulated.
I mean, many would say that treating people with heroine addiction is indeed better accomplished by giving them safe spaces to wean them off rather than criminalising them, yes.
But the American War on Drugs has been an unvarnished success, of course, so that’s obviously the best approach.
I do actually think that harm reduction is a better strategy than criminalization, so I’m not advocating for banning gambling outright. But I think that its dubious value as entertainment needs to be weighed against the harm that it causes, and that regulation should be put in place to address those harms efficiently.
Then we are in violent agreement. (I mean, I genuinely think gambling is fun, in moderation - so I probably wouldn’t say “dubious value”, but otherwise I agree 100%. Some people cannot enjoy it safely, and they should totally be protected by regulation.)
Yeah and I recognize that I’m the weird one who doesn’t enjoy gambling at all. I realize that lots of people, if not most, do find the lottery or some gambling to be fun, and I know that most people that do so are doing it responsibly and understand that on average, they’re losing money. Even if I don’t see the entertainment value for myself I have to accept that everyone is not like me.
Gambling is addictive and exploitative. A lot of effort goes into keeping players engaged, exploiting the pleasure response centers of the brain. It’s not just refined folk betting on horses, but gacha games, loot boxes, slot machines, prediction markets. Gritty and sleazy.
If your lucked out with your genes just be happy, and don’t call people with a high risk of addiction inadequate idiots.
“Exploiting the pleasure response centres of the brain” is pseudo-scientific twaddle for “a lot of effort goes into making it fun”.
Yes, yes it does. That’s a good thing.
And I didn’t “luck out” with my genes. They’re perfectly in line with the vast majority of people. That some people are cursed with inadequate faculties is a reason they should be protected (through regulation), not a reason for normal people to have their freedom curtailed.
We don’t ban movies because some people are blind.
Woah ya’ll chill. I’m pretty sure it’s a widely studied topic that gambling (winning a bunch of money) and cocaine cause the same parts of the brain to fire.
Okay but the argument isn’t that gambling is bad. It’s that gambling ads and apps are. A gambling addict who gambles at a casino has to physically go to the casino and can only gamble as long as their body will allow them. Sure they can ruin their lives but there are physical unavoidable things that limit their gambling. To say nothing about the responsibility we’ve decided casinos have to address gambling addiction. A casino can kick a player out, sure they can go to another but that’s time they don’t spend gambling.
Gambling ads and apps are everywhere. They’re inescapable. An addict doesn’t have to physically go to a casino anymore. They can gamble wherever, whenever, on anything. If they try to pull themselves away the apps use push notifications to pull them in. Uninstall the apps, the ads are running everywhere all the time. Get banned, just make a new account. It takes minutes. The availability to gamble is just constant now.
If nothing else, ban gambling ads. It won’t stop people but it’ll let them escape the constant push to get back in.
I mean, an argument whose answer is “make all gambling” illegal - which is what we’re talking about here - clearly is founded on “all gambling is bad”.
Personally I’d agree with you about heavily curtailing, or even banning, advertising and sponsorship. And putting in place restrictions on amount wagered, loss limits, mandatory self exclusion registers etc. But all that is regulation, not an outright ban. (I’m not even particularly against a state monopoly tbh.)
Blind people listening to a movie doesn’t destroy their life the way gambling does. Get your head out of the sand.
Eh literally everything is entertaining so it’s not a very interesting metric to measure anything.
That’s a ridiculous remark even for lemmy.world.
Are your suggesting that entertainment has no value? That the people must be condemned only to Being Productive 24/7?
Guy above is suggesting that gambling is a very harmful entertainment and that there are better ways to entertain yourself
And guy above is wrong.
Gambling is “very harmful” to a tiny minority of people who have a disorder. That is very sad for them, and they should be protected from themselves through proportionate regulation.
I’m quite sure - this being lemmy - that plenty here think the “War on Drugs” is absurd and has failed, and that responsible people who know their limits are being punished and forced into illegal markets because a few people are unable to control themselves. And they’d be right. All prohibition does is force ordinary people into black markets and everybody loses.
As for alcohol - that damages far more people than gambling ever will. Personally, I am sufficiently competent to simply not drink alcohol, but I understand many are not capable of that - but I nevertheless don’t advocate for prohibition.
You’re diminishing the harms of gambling. Entertainment is cheap and one of societal areas where we can afford safety.
The question is how many people are harmed/unharmed by gambling? If say 2% of all bettors develop a gambling addiction, does that warrant a complete ban? What if it was 0,5% ? I don’t know the actual numbers on this but I generally think that you shouldn’t illegalsize for the many what is a problem for a small minority. I watch hours upon hours of sports with betting ads and I have never engaged in betting because I’m self aware enough to know that I might not be able to handle it if I get of “to a good start”.
It’s the same problem with drug prohibition.
According to reputable sources (Lancet), around 1.5% of people engage in problematic gambling, with at-risk harder to estimate but probably around 8%. Compared to around 50% of people overall who participate in gambling perfectly happily (and the rest don’t engage at all.).
Interestingly, there is a high co-morbidity with substance abuse and alcoholism. So if it’s all about protecting those people, we need to ban alcohol as well (and win the war on drugs - haha.)
That’s what I’m saying. To me, 1,5% is way too few people that it warrants banning an activity that the vast majority can handle - even though the ads for gambling are through the roof. Just like alcohol. Take Norway, s country that is known for its very strict alcohol laws. According to https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/alcoholism-by-country (don’t know creditably), 1,59% suffer from alcoholism. Sweden is 2,81%.
However, it’s too different debates. My stand is that it’s all about proper relegation and education.
It’s not only about addiction. Gambling industry is very corrosive overall being a major source for money laundering, financial exploitation and source of conflict. Generally I’m very libertarian but gambling is just an incredibly toxic industry because it has so many invisible costs that is more than just addiction.
Depends on regulations. In my country, the main big gambling company transfers their income to social projects
There is zero money laundering in well regulated gaming. None. Regulated gaming businesses have better AML & KYC than most banks.
Black market though - 100%. Why do you want to help black market operators?
The harms of gambling are, by and large, tiny. Significantly less than alcohol or drugs.
We can’t only ban the entertainments you don’t like. You’re either a prohibitionist or not.
How are you sourcing these claims? I from a gambling friendly country and now live in one where gambling is illegal and the societal damage caused by gambling is very noticeable. Though, I’d say big chunk of it is coming from gambling advertisements and legal physical casinos with no advertisements allowed would be very fair compromise imo.
| Harm | Annual cost to England | Source | | ---- | ---- | ---- | Gambling | £1.05–1.77bn | OHID (UK government), 2023 Illegal drugs | £19.3bn | Dame Carol Black review / UK government response, 2021 Alcohol | £27.4bn | Institute of Alcohol Studies, 2024England of course has had a well regulated gambling environment for literally centuries, and regulated online for the best part of 30 years; in an unregulated/prohibition state, I’d expect the numbers for gambling to look worse. Because that’s what regulation does - it minimises harms.
Probibition does not minimise harms. The 1.5% who are serious problem gamblers will be on black market sites the next day, now with zero protection. The maybe 8% who are at-risk are much more likely to find themselves on a black market site with zero protection, and the remaining 50% who enjoyed gambling and were never harmed by it are the ones that lose out.
Brazil, for avoidance of doubt, did not have a well-regulated sector. I doubt - and I speak from direct experience - that there was a single operator in Brazil that didn’t have someone in the regulator on their payroll.
Brazil’s problem isn’t gambling, it’s corruption. This is just a sideshow.
A lot Christian fundies in here downvoting you. If we scratch a little more we might see how they actually feel about gay people and Dungeons & Dragons.
Lemmy has a deeply fucking weird vibe tbh. It’s like Karl Marx just stepped off the Mayflower. And I love the fact that it’s A Truth Universally Acknowledged that children should be allowed to use social media unimpeded (because Age Verification Is The State Surveilling You And Stealing Your Precious Bodily Fluids), and teens should be allowed to change their gender and take permanently life-altering drugs or surgery to do it (Because They Know Their Choices And Anyone Suggesting Otherwise Is An Oppressive Bourgeois Traitor Probably Trying To Steal Their Precious Bodily Fluids) but grown-ass adults can’t put a few quid on their team to win because They Are Vulnerable And Cannot Make Their Own Decisions Lest Their Precious Bodily Fluids Go To Waste Instead of the Collective. And God Forbid you suggest anyone with an entirely imagined Neurodivergent Condition (“OMG does anyone else go to sleep when they’re tired? I only understood this when I self diagnosed as autistic, normies could never understand”) be told what THEY are allowed to do because you’re just Oppressing Them FFS.
It really is through the looking glass.