4 ms·
Is gambling a grievance? There are lots of things the government rightly doesn’t let us do, or, strongly discourages us from doing, because they are bad for us.
by irrational 3y ago
Is gambling a grievance? There are lots of things the government rightly doesn’t let us do, or, strongly discourages us from doing, because they are bad for us. Of course, this is the same government that supports gambling in the form of the lottery, so clearly they don’t have people’s best interests in mind.
- hammock 3y agoMy uncle, who is disabled, made $10000 in Vegas last month. My second cousin won the lottery 7 years ago and bought emission-free vehicles for her entire family. Was gambling bad for them?
- ajkjk 3y agoAs you are no doubt aware, if you're evaluating if a thing is good or bad you have to consider its net effect, not a couple isolated examples. This is just a "smoking feels good and well I didn't get lung cancer" argument.
- hammock 3y agoMy uncle plays at the Mirage, so excess profits benefit a forgotten community (the Seminole tribe) that was historically and brutally marginalized by the privileged ‘society’ whose net effect you are considering. The lottery proceeds fund public schools.
- WarOnPrivacy 3y ago> The lottery proceeds fund public schools. Because a corresponding amount of general budget funds were diverted away from schools, the inference is untrue.
- hammock 3y agoDarn can’t get anything right. Just tell me who to vote for so I can get back to my shows
- ajkjk 3y agoAs with all things: if you ignore all the downsides, yes, the upsides look good.
- plagiarist 3y agoThe uncle that won $10,000? So that little tidbit wasn't good after all, he was stealing money from a historically marginalized community. And the lotto winner was similarly taking money from public schools.
- evanriley 3y agoSomeone in Las Vegas last month lost $10,000. For the last 7 years someone has religiously purchased lottery tickets, never winning. Was gambling good for them? See, we can all play this shit game.
- triceratops 3y agoYes. It taught them gambling pays, and makes them more likely to lose money in the future.
- raincole 3y ago> Was gambling bad for them? Yes, without doubt. > who is disabled Even worse.
- Ylpertnodi 3y agoHow do you think it was bad for them, if you don't know them? And, why are disabled winners 'even worse'?
- raincole 3y agoI notice another comment already explained, so I'll just borrow it: > It taught them gambling pays, and makes them more likely to lose money in the future. By definition gambling is losing money in long terms (otherwise it's investing, not gambling). A disabled is less likely to recover after a financial disaster.
- aardshark 3y agoSo if their net worth only goes up for the rest of their lives, you would consider them to have successfully invested, rather than gambled? Seems to me your definition is a bit lacking.
- tourmalinetaco 3y agoObviously because reinforcing what is most likely a psychological addiction is not a good thing, especially amongst a population who in other legal contexts cannot typically give informed consent? Frankly you come off as purposefully obtuse for the sake of arguing.
- hammock 3y agoMy uncle is a triple amputee war vet with a Stanford degree and I’m not sure how he would take to your removal of his agency via accusations of inability to consent or safely gamble
- 3y ago
- bezier-curve 3y agoExceptions don't make it good for the majority of society. Those exceptions are also what keeps people hooked, chasing a carrot until their bank account is empty.
- nicwolff 3y agoHow much has your uncle lost gambling, in his life? How much has your cousin spent on lottery tickets, in her life?