3 ms·
> Should we ban or limit alcohol to some nominal amount? If not, why should we treat gambling differently? No, because nobody steals $4 million to buy alcohol.
by ikeboy 10y ago
> Should we ban or limit alcohol to some nominal amount? If not, why should we treat gambling differently?
No, because nobody steals $4 million to buy alcohol. Alcoholics don't tend to be spending anywhere near the numbers in OP.
Even if nominal was 0, the proposal would still prevent stealing or borrowed money being gambled. It's not an essential part of the proposal.
If tax authorities are overlooking theft being gambled because they get a cut, then incentives have not been lined up properly. Theft causes a negative externality greater than the thief's gain, so society should not want theft, and if it does then there's a problem.
- tomjen3 10y agoHowever some alcoholics spend so much time getting drunk/being drunk they can't do their jobs and so end up on the street. I don't object that nobody should gamble on stolen or borrowed money (though some hedge funds may disagree), but that is different from having some nominal limit. For one how about savings? How about retired people with too much time and large pensions? How about saving up for a honeymoon in vegas?
- NTripleOne 10y agoWhat about the alcoholic who drinks himself half to death and ends up on life support with no insurance? The kind that literally cost hundreds of thousands in medical expenses to keep alive for another day.