3 ms·
For online gambling, why not just tax the stuff? India pulls in 30% of any player's winnings as tax, for example. The gaming companies also have to pay 28% of
by dartharva 2y ago
For online gambling, why not just tax the stuff?
India pulls in 30% of any player's winnings as tax, for example. The gaming companies also have to pay 28% of their revenue (yes, revenue, not income).
- stubish 2y agoThe laws are to enforce the ruling group's religious morals.
- SapporoChris 2y agoPerhaps, it could also be protecting the masses from exploitation of gambling companies. The odds are never in a gambler's favor.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- stubish 2y agoBoth. Most religions consider gambling immoral because it leads to social harm. You need to favor personal freedoms and personal responsibility more to justify taxing gambling rather than banning it. Or acknowledging that prohibition may cause more social harm than not. But only more secular governments get to allow harmful vices for the greater good.
- mock-possum 2y ago“Only more secular governments get to allow harmful vices for the greater good.” I hadn’t really thought about it before, but yeah, that’s naturally the way it goes.
- gregw2 2y agoI think a wise secularist may see greater good in less gambling. Not every secularist is a libertarian in their tradeoffs of "what is good" for people. There is usually some reason vices are squashed that is not religious in nature; take the China society's approach to various vices for example.
- numpad0 2y agoTaxation won't even slow paperclip maximizers... 30% is same as Apple in-app fee. See how that negatively affected mobile lootbox genre and helped Apple escape from becoming slowly but increasingly dependent on that industry.
- fendy3002 2y agoBecause some of them are backed up by powerful people. Most of the time this kind of action is just posturing, and not really fixing the problem