3 ms·

"betting parlors"...I have never heard of this term used anywhere. You have high-street bookmakers, there are a lot of regulations about what they can and can't

"betting parlors"...I have never heard of this term used anywhere. You have high-street bookmakers, there are a lot of regulations about what they can and can't do, they aren't a very big part of the business anymore (and have been in decline for about ten years). Most old men used to meet up with their friends and put a line on for the races...you don't enjoy that, maybe you don't have friends to go places with but other people did...what is the issue? The government has wisely cracked down on FBOTs, the worst part of that model that appeared after sports betting moved online. The culture that exists today (as this industry disappears) is nothing to do with what it was (and, btw, the move online has seen the vig go down by something like 90%...so that isn't bad either). The really weird one is casinos in the US: until Adelson died, both parties largest donors were the casino industry...now it just the Dems. You have zero harm protection, zero regulations, and massive levels of political corruption. In the UK, these companies pay lots of tax, they invest heavily in technology, and until last year were the only people funding gambling addiction...the government, which runs the healthcare system, refused to do so. The rate of harm from online gambling is usually under 1% and highest in markets that are either overregulated (i.e. Hong Kong) or unregulated (i.e. US). You "lose" every time you go to the cinema, buy food, do anything by your terms is a loss. You want to gamble on sports, someone will take your bet, what is the issue? Casino/table games are pointless, but this isn't what "betting parlors" are and this isn't the culture in Europe which skews heavily towards sports betting, which is relatively low-harm. Again, look at the US: crypto, zero-day options, etc. There is value in having an outlet, because people are going to do this stuff whether it is legal or not.

_factor 3y ago
You don't have to get rid of it, just treat as what it is.. a negative addiction pattern. As it is right now, it's a first class member of society in the US. Treat it more like regulated substances like tobacco. Allowed, but with big warnings and not in plain view. I don't know about your harm statistics, but I've personally seen friends irresponsibly lose money after legalization. It used to be much more manageable before.
- skippyboxedhero 3y ago
  Just look at research. The harm rates are stable across countries because gambling addiction is a real addiction, it occurs regardless of governmental structure (but serious harm can be prevented by effective regulation, HK is an example of a country where overregulation has led to massive harm). It didn't use to be manageable before, you probably just didn't hear of it happening. Remember online poker used to be widespread. Illegal sports betting was very widespread. Someone "irresponsibly" losing money isn't the same thing as an addiction either (if you do research into why people get addicted to gambling, you will find out that it isn't about money, it is often about sensory experiences which sports betting does not provide).
Symbiote 3y ago
You sound like a politician defending gambling after receiving a large donation from 888, or else an employee at a betting company.
- skippyboxedhero 3y ago
  The irony being that regulation basically removes this avenue. And you have a country like the US where sports betting was totally illegal, and the largest donor for both parties was...casino-linked donors. Lol. This works precisely in the opposite way that you think.

_factor 3y ago

You don't have to get rid of it, just treat as what it is.. a negative addiction pattern. As it is right now, it's a first class member of society in the US. Treat it more like regulated substances like tobacco. Allowed, but with big warnings and not in plain view. I don't know about your harm statistics, but I've personally seen friends irresponsibly lose money after legalization. It used to be much more manageable before.

skippyboxedhero 3y ago
Just look at research. The harm rates are stable across countries because gambling addiction is a real addiction, it occurs regardless of governmental structure (but serious harm can be prevented by effective regulation, HK is an example of a country where overregulation has led to massive harm). It didn't use to be manageable before, you probably just didn't hear of it happening. Remember online poker used to be widespread. Illegal sports betting was very widespread. Someone "irresponsibly" losing money isn't the same thing as an addiction either (if you do research into why people get addicted to gambling, you will find out that it isn't about money, it is often about sensory experiences which sports betting does not provide).

Symbiote 3y ago

You sound like a politician defending gambling after receiving a large donation from 888, or else an employee at a betting company.

skippyboxedhero 3y ago
The irony being that regulation basically removes this avenue. And you have a country like the US where sports betting was totally illegal, and the largest donor for both parties was...casino-linked donors. Lol. This works precisely in the opposite way that you think.