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.
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.
Source? You’re just posting some AI hallucinations.
The references were given. It’s not my job to do your research for you.
Sure thing bot. Have a day.
If that’s the best you’ve got, then my work here is done.
Good luck with the revolution, or whatever it is you have planned today. Up the proles, and all that.