3 ms·

With the government bleeding red it would be a good way to raise some tax revenue. I listened to a hearing with Annie Duke in front of congress. They all agreed

With the government bleeding red it would be a good way to raise some tax revenue. I listened to a hearing with Annie Duke in front of congress. They all agreed the current laws didn't make sense. Somebody has to take charge and get them changed. The basic idea was now the states can decide if gambling is legal but online gambling is a federal issue essentially overriding the states. Unless they can find a way to block all gambling traffic from state x.

anigbrowl 16y ago
I've never understood why there are so many legal restrictions on gambling in the US. Where I come from (Ireland/UK) there are lots of betting shops - mostly catering to sports betting, but you can walk in and ask for odds on anything, such as the outcome of a forthcoming election or whatever. Casinos are no big deal (though they cater mainly to the better-off) and most pubs or other social spots have a slot machine or two. Of course, some people are compulsive gamblers and experience problems as a result. On the other hand my local 7-11 (24 hour convenience store) attracts gambling addicts too, one guy shows up there once a month and hangs out all night playing a quick lottery and smoking two packs of cigarettes. For a while I thought prohibition policy existed because the state wants a monopoly on lottery revenue, but state lotteries seem to be just as profitable in Europe as they are here despite the much lower payouts. The rates of gambling addiction don't seem much different. I have virtually no interest in the pursuit other than buying a lottery ticket on a whim maybe once a year, but it's similar enough to video gaming that I can see how people get hooked on it - probably something akin to a dopamine deficiency. Prohibition seems pointless and wasteful; better to deal with reality and divert a percentage of the revenue to mitigation services.
- gte910h 16y ago
  European lotteries actually tend to have much higher percentages of money paid, but much lower payouts. They're "less of a bad deal" from an odds perspective than American lotteries.
- adamilardi 16y ago
  I think it goes back to our protestant religious roots. The church does not like gambling(for obvious reasons).

anigbrowl 16y ago

I've never understood why there are so many legal restrictions on gambling in the US. Where I come from (Ireland/UK) there are lots of betting shops - mostly catering to sports betting, but you can walk in and ask for odds on anything, such as the outcome of a forthcoming election or whatever. Casinos are no big deal (though they cater mainly to the better-off) and most pubs or other social spots have a slot machine or two. Of course, some people are compulsive gamblers and experience problems as a result. On the other hand my local 7-11 (24 hour convenience store) attracts gambling addicts too, one guy shows up there once a month and hangs out all night playing a quick lottery and smoking two packs of cigarettes. For a while I thought prohibition policy existed because the state wants a monopoly on lottery revenue, but state lotteries seem to be just as profitable in Europe as they are here despite the much lower payouts. The rates of gambling addiction don't seem much different. I have virtually no interest in the pursuit other than buying a lottery ticket on a whim maybe once a year, but it's similar enough to video gaming that I can see how people get hooked on it - probably something akin to a dopamine deficiency. Prohibition seems pointless and wasteful; better to deal with reality and divert a percentage of the revenue to mitigation services.

gte910h 16y ago
European lotteries actually tend to have much higher percentages of money paid, but much lower payouts. They're "less of a bad deal" from an odds perspective than American lotteries.
adamilardi 16y ago
I think it goes back to our protestant religious roots. The church does not like gambling(for obvious reasons).