14 ms·

Sports gambling has been legal in the UK since 1960. Gambling wasn't seriously problematic in this country until 2005, when regulations were substantially liber

Sports gambling has been legal in the UK since 1960. Gambling wasn't seriously problematic in this country until 2005, when regulations were substantially liberalised. Pre-2005, sports betting was something that old men did in dingy backstreet shops; post-2005, it became a widespread social phenomenon, turbocharged by advertising and the growing influence and accessibility of the internet. There's a false dichotomy between prohibition and laissez-faire, which the US seems particularly prone to. You've seen similar issues with the decriminalisation of cannabis, where many states seem to have switched abruptly from criminalisation to a fully-fledged commercial market. There is a broad spectrum of other options in between those points that tend to be under-discussed. You can ban gambling advertising, as Italy did in 2019. You can set limits on maximum stakes or impose regulations to make gambling products less attractive to new customers and less risky for problem gamblers. You can have a single state-controlled parimutuel operator. Gambling does cause harm - whether it's legal or not - but it is within the purview of legislators to create a gambling market in which harm reduction is the main priority.

divan 2y ago
White paper on recent UK reform of the Gambling Act for the digital age. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambl...
MavisBacon 2y ago
I understand your position in theory but feel the comparison to cannabis is a bit unfair. Most physicians will agree that cannabis is fairly harmless in adults. Gambling, however has previously in the U.S. shown to be the leading cause of suicide attempts (20% in total) among all forms of addiction [1]. A body of evidence has also demonstrated it leads to divorce, bankruptcy, poor health and sometimes incarceration. Worth noting many of these studies centered around machine gambling and all forms of gambling are unique in terms of tendency for compulsion. Considering the landscape it is quite difficult for me to see a way of regulating out of this, not in the U.S. at least. [1] Zangeneh and Hason 2006, 191-93
- nemetroid 2y ago
  It’s just an example.
  - MavisBacon 2y ago
    That's fair, and I really don't fundamentally disagree with what they said I just wanted to add some cultural context here. Will plead ignorance that my experience working on issues of "addiction" or compulsions outside of the U.S. is incredibly thin but, knowing how compulsion tends to play out stateside- these are my observations. I'm genuinely concerned considering how poorly we've done treating those with substance use disorder, which I think is arguably simpler than gambling addiction in some respects
    - nemetroid 2y ago
      I don't necessarily disagree, but the original comment didn't suggest that gambling and cannabis are equally harmful, or even that cannabis is harmful. The point was that policymaking seems to tend toward all-or-nothing (either fully prohibited, or anything goes), and the legalization of cannabis is a recent example of that. The goods or harms of cannabis are beside the point.
- vasco 2y ago
  > Most physicians will agree that cannabis is fairly harmless. If you read some papers on the subject it should be plenty apparent that it has adverse effects on the development of young adults, as well as long term use by anyone, particularly of recent high-potency strains. It's not as bad as other drugs (heroine), and it's worse than others (coffee), but it's not harmless. I'm far from being a prohibitionist, and live somewhere that has (I think) sensible policies (The Netherlands), but to simply put that it's "fairly harmless" as something most physicians agree with is not true. I'd say it's similar to alcohol in terms of its moderate use being possible in a working society - albeit with some negative outcomes for people that overdo it, or do it too early in life. Edit: there's lots of discussion below about if the studies that exist are trustworthy or not, but since anyone can google for studies, I'll leave a different recommendation to check out the r/Leaves subreddit, and read some first hand accounts of long term and heavy users. It's at least a different type of source and you can make up your own mind about what real users say about it, in case you never encountered it before.
riffraff 2y ago
I agree with you 100% but just one thing of note > You can ban gambling advertising, as Italy did in 2019 this has been widely sidestepped, betting companies now advertise something like "sport-results.com" and then that one has a prominent link to the betting site.
- sva_ 2y ago
  Isn't sport-results.com then advertising for gambling, which should be illegal?!
  - mattdeboard 2y ago
    This is the whole problem with half-measures
  - LadyCailin 2y ago
    If someone posts a link to a gambling site on Facebook, should Facebook be banned?
    - gverrilla 2y ago
      Facebook has to abide to the local laws.
    - TimPC 2y ago
      You probably don’t ban Facebook as a whole but if they fail to crack down on gambling links that violate advertising laws or allow gambling companies to advertise in spite of those laws they probably face heavy fines from regulators.
      - mminer237 2y ago
        I think the issue he's raising is how you define advertising though. Is texting your friend a link advertising? What about posting a link on a forum? On Wikipedia? On your portfolio? On your footer? On your nav bar? I think everyone agrees the name should not be damnatio memoriae nor should you be able to link to a click-wrapper, but people will always push the gray area in between as far as they can for that kind of money.
BobbyJo 2y ago
> There is a broad spectrum of other options in between those points that tend to be under-discussed. Where we fall on that spectrum is generally a matter of culture, rather than regulation. American culture is one of maximalism, especially when it comes to commercialization.
- eesmith 2y ago
  Regulation is the enforcement and control of culture. They cannot really be disentangled. American culture is not one of maximalism. Going overseas I was surprised to see tobacco products and beer legal at 16 or 18, people drinking alcohol in the open at parks, soft-porn on late-night broadcast TV, and newsstands with uncovered porn magazines. All of which are commercialization. Further, a maximalism interpretation can't be used to understand American culture pre-1974, when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibited banks from preventing women from getting a bank account, nor pre-1964, when the Civil Rights Act prohibited most businesses from preventing blacks from exercising the same commercial maximalism as whites.
  - BobbyJo 2y ago
    I am pointing out that, the moment betting and marijuana got the "you can profit from this" nod, money poured in and profit seeking explodes. Build! Advertise! Build! Advertise! This is the American way. Capital circles potential profits like vultures waiting for regulation to die. I don't think many other countries' private markets act as extreme in this regard. >All of which are commercialization I feel like those are just cultural norms as opposed to commercialization pressure. > Further, a maximalism interpretation can't be used to understand American culture pre-1974, when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibited banks from preventing women from getting a bank account, nor pre-1964, when the Civil Rights Act prohibited most businesses from preventing blacks from exercising the same commercial maximalism as whites. I am failing to draw a line from your point to your argument here. I was referring to commercial maximalism, not sexual and racial equality maximalism.
    - eesmith 2y ago
fredgrott 2y ago
cannabis not a good example as it is still criminalize at Fed level including earning money in that industry and putting it in a federal licensed bank...
DrBazza 2y ago
I absolutely hate that gambling adverts on TV are legal in the UK. I've seen at least one friend's life ruined because of it. 9pm, and it's wall-to-wall. Ironically, this is around the same time as bans on smoking in pubs, and tobacco advertising became draconian. But gambling doesn't do any first-order physical harm, so it's all good, right? Seeing betting firms on the front of football teams' shirts offends me. > When Tony Blair's Labour government introduced the Gambling Act in 2005, it allowed gambling firms to advertise sports betting, poker and online casinos on TV and radio for the first time. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64510095 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64510095
- Pufferbo 2y ago
  Whenever I’m introduce a friend to the JLeague, 90% of the time the first they compliment is the lack of gambling adds. It really is a breath of fresh air. And I believe that if the JLegaue used this point in its international marketing, it would work to get a lot of people tired of gambling ads to want to follow the league.
  - Marsymars 2y ago
    It’s also unfortunately a problem in niche sports that don’t really have international gambling-ad-free leagues. e.g. If you want to watch professional curling, your options are pretty slim, and they’re gambling sponsored. The curling community is also pretty small, so even though I’m nowhere near pro-level, I overlap with some of them - would be disappointing if I couldn’t watch the events with curlers from my city/country.
- 34679 2y ago
  Bans cost money to enforce, while diminishing personal choice and responsibility. Why not spend that money on education instead? I've not had an ad in my home or on my mobile devices for well over a decade, and I've spent exactly zero on additional hardware to make that happen. It takes less than 10 minutes to configure a new device to be completely ad-free. I won't purchase anything that can't be configured to be free of ads, including smart TVs and iPhones. I still watch whatever content I want on my TV via HDMI from a PC. If our governments are going to be involved, their focus should be on teaching people how to do what people like me do. It's not difficult.
lumb63 2y ago
I was a big proponent of legalizing sports gambling before it happened here in the US. After that, one of my best friends lost 5 figures on sports gambling that he really couldn’t afford to lose. I’ve also watched sports talk shows degrade to simple betting tips, and TV is now borderline unwatchable due to the pharmaceutical and gambling ads. To me, a few regulations/restrictions seem useful. I think broad legalization went too far. One regulation would be banning gambling advertising, for the same reason why smoking ads are (I think?) banned. It is especially nefarious how companies lure in new customers with free bets, often with unscrupulous cash-out conditions, in order to get people hooked. It’s the equivalent of ads providing someone a coupon code to get several boxes of free cigarettes, at which point they get hooked. Another change I’d like to see is the end of mobile gambling. I’ve never done it, but from watching friends do it, it was far too easy to deposit money, or borrow money on credit, and bet it frivolously. At least if such behavior is confined to a casino, there is some larger barrier to entry for people. I do not know if this is true in other states, but certain states have the ability for an individual to self-institute a gambling ban at all facilities in the state. I’m not sure if this applies to gambling online. If not, then it should. And if other states don’t have it, then they would greatly benefit from it. It also seems somewhat fair to me to tax the casinos and other companies profiting from gambling and using that money to fund services for people who become addicted. If you’re going to help create a problem, you should have to help clean it up.
- bombcar 2y ago
  Requiring gambling to be done at established facilities or even the sports facility itself and limiting the bets to five dollars or some nominal amount would solve 99% of the problems.
  - verdverm 2y ago
    Limiting it to a licensed location, instead of app or website, and requiring cash instead of credit would likely be sufficient.
    - gosub100 2y ago
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
DoubleGlazing 2y ago
I live in Dublin where a lot of the tech developement centres for many online bookmaker and casinos are based. I have been approached by recruiters for some of them and even though they offer VERY generous packages I refuse to work for them on moral grounds. The thing that bothers me the most is that they know a lot of poitential employees have issues with the whole sector, so they try to give it a false veneer of acceptability. A good example of that was that both Paddy Power and Boyle Sports referred to themselves as suppliers of "risk-based entertainment" in their recruitment literature, something I found to be very sleazy. I also know people who work for some of these companies and they tell me that all their talk about caring for problem gamblers is complete nonsense and that they actively seek ways to lure back problem gamblers who were able to quit. It's also very weird that as governments around the world are cracking down on alcohol poromotion at the same time they seem to be encouraging the promotion of gambling. I would say gambling can do as much harm to a family as alcohol addiction can. I'm frankly shocked at the amount of gambling adverts there are these days. And so many of them carry the subtle sub-text that if you don't bet on your team then you aren't a true fan. The problem is that people will gamble no matter what, so providing a safe way to do so is better than banning it. I agree with you that it's all about to what degree you allow gambling. At the very least I would ban advertising as it's effectively normalising something that most definitely should not be normalised.
- xhkkffbf 2y ago
  Gambling isn't the only form of entertainment meant to tickle the part of the brain that craves risk. Movies have car chases. Amusement parks have roller coasters. And many jobs involve taking risks. Investment houses. Sales. etc. We reward those who take risks because society (often) benefits. I find it much easier to argue against standard casino games because it's pretty easy to mathematically prove that the gambler will end up broke. With sports, it's a bit harder. As long as the vig is small enough, smart gamblers who know the teams can eke out a profit. If anything, sports gambling rewards study, thought, and focus, all things we should celebrate. THat doesn't mean I like. I would like to see it banned. But it means I have trouble arguing against it with any vigor.
  - 2y ago
kqr 2y ago
Right -- this is much like alcohol, something which is roughly as dangerous as gambling -- but also as enjoyable to people who can do it responsibly. It's not a choice between prohibition and selling it in the grocery store. There are many nuances in between.
sidewndr46 2y ago
States changed their laws around cannabis as a measure to gather votes and to increase tax revenues. Theories of markets and economics have little to do with it.
wyldfire 2y ago
> You can ban gambling advertising, as Italy did in 2019 The US already has plenty of legislation regulating advertisements of other vices, so I think a similar ban is totally appropriate here.
Biologist123 2y ago
Good luck with all your less profitable options: have a look at how much lobbying the sector does.
piltdownman 2y ago
Pre 1970s it was something you did at the on-track TOTE and in Bingo Halls/Working Mens Clubs. Games of skill with money wagered have always been a significant part of Western European society, starting with the Equestrian Aristocratic classes and funnelling all the way down to the 'Football Pools' and the national pastimes of putting a wager down for the Grand National or Cheltenham festivals, legitimised by social events like Ladies Day or Student Race Week. There are multiple ways of 'fairer' gambling - exchange markets like Betfair rather than sportsbook being the current epitome. The main issue is lack of legislation around targeting vulnerable demographics and those suffering from addictive traits - and that's an advertising rather than a gambling issue.
fennecfoxy 2y ago
Technology is the tool that magnifies both good and bad things. It's up to us to prevent bad things at the source, not ban the tool; it's the social media problem, really.
BobAliceInATree 2y ago
Every state is supposed to be a "laboratory" of democracy, but we really screwed the pooch with cannabis legalization. At least one state should have gone the way with absolutely zero marketing allowed (like tobacco currently is), and all containers should be in standardized, sterile, black & white containers, with only the name & description of the product, and big warnings describing the dangers (like cigarette packs in Australia). 24 legalized states, and not one chose this approach which is a shame.
- olyjohn 2y ago
  They're not cigarettes. Nobody is sitting down and smoking 40 joints a day. What serious dangers are there besides the fact that you might eat the entire bag of Doritos while watching Planet Earth?
  - alan-crowe 2y ago
    The important context is that life is short, just seventy years, and has stages, your early twenties are a magical time. Losing your ambition and wasting your early twenties are a subtle danger, but nevertheless a serious danger.
    - ThunderSizzle 2y ago
      [flagged]
    - lotsofpulp 2y ago
      One of the more ridiculous assertions I have seen, as if cannabis causes people to lose ambitions, any more than a million other things that can happen in society. You know, like wage stagnation in the face of skyrocketing real estate costs.
      - mensetmanusman 2y ago
        The high levels of thc concentration make the new drugs ‘not your dad’s weed’
NemoNobody 2y ago
It's like you let the kids play with fire but then you make sure to have the first aid kits ready.
biorach 2y ago
> There's a false dichotomy between prohibition and laissez-faire, which the US seems particularly prone to. Nicely put
SunlitCat 2y ago
> There's a false dichotomy between prohibition and laissez-faire, which the US seems particularly prone to. You are raising an interesting question there. I always wondered why in US many things have to be either Yes or Now, Good or Bad, Black or White, Left or Right, Up or Down and so on. No (or very few) things, opinions or anything in between.
- amelius 2y ago
  Democrats or Republicans. With only two choices for everything the country is set up for polarization.
dylan604 2y ago
> in this country until 2005, when regulations were substantially liberalised I've always found it very striking when the sports team jersey sponsers are betting companies.
Carport7829 2y ago
Gambling - Causing harm since (at least) the Iron Age. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_Lament https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_Lament

divan 2y ago

White paper on recent UK reform of the Gambling Act for the digital age. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambling-reform-for-the-digital-age https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-stakes-gambl...

MavisBacon 2y ago

I understand your position in theory but feel the comparison to cannabis is a bit unfair. Most physicians will agree that cannabis is fairly harmless in adults. Gambling, however has previously in the U.S. shown to be the leading cause of suicide attempts (20% in total) among all forms of addiction [1]. A body of evidence has also demonstrated it leads to divorce, bankruptcy, poor health and sometimes incarceration. Worth noting many of these studies centered around machine gambling and all forms of gambling are unique in terms of tendency for compulsion. Considering the landscape it is quite difficult for me to see a way of regulating out of this, not in the U.S. at least. [1] Zangeneh and Hason 2006, 191-93

nemetroid 2y ago
It’s just an example.
- MavisBacon 2y ago
  That's fair, and I really don't fundamentally disagree with what they said I just wanted to add some cultural context here. Will plead ignorance that my experience working on issues of "addiction" or compulsions outside of the U.S. is incredibly thin but, knowing how compulsion tends to play out stateside- these are my observations. I'm genuinely concerned considering how poorly we've done treating those with substance use disorder, which I think is arguably simpler than gambling addiction in some respects
  - nemetroid 2y ago
    I don't necessarily disagree, but the original comment didn't suggest that gambling and cannabis are equally harmful, or even that cannabis is harmful. The point was that policymaking seems to tend toward all-or-nothing (either fully prohibited, or anything goes), and the legalization of cannabis is a recent example of that. The goods or harms of cannabis are beside the point.
vasco 2y ago
> Most physicians will agree that cannabis is fairly harmless. If you read some papers on the subject it should be plenty apparent that it has adverse effects on the development of young adults, as well as long term use by anyone, particularly of recent high-potency strains. It's not as bad as other drugs (heroine), and it's worse than others (coffee), but it's not harmless. I'm far from being a prohibitionist, and live somewhere that has (I think) sensible policies (The Netherlands), but to simply put that it's "fairly harmless" as something most physicians agree with is not true. I'd say it's similar to alcohol in terms of its moderate use being possible in a working society - albeit with some negative outcomes for people that overdo it, or do it too early in life. Edit: there's lots of discussion below about if the studies that exist are trustworthy or not, but since anyone can google for studies, I'll leave a different recommendation to check out the r/Leaves subreddit, and read some first hand accounts of long term and heavy users. It's at least a different type of source and you can make up your own mind about what real users say about it, in case you never encountered it before.

riffraff 2y ago

I agree with you 100% but just one thing of note > You can ban gambling advertising, as Italy did in 2019 this has been widely sidestepped, betting companies now advertise something like "sport-results.com" and then that one has a prominent link to the betting site.

sva_ 2y ago
Isn't sport-results.com then advertising for gambling, which should be illegal?!
- mattdeboard 2y ago
  This is the whole problem with half-measures
- LadyCailin 2y ago
  If someone posts a link to a gambling site on Facebook, should Facebook be banned?
  - gverrilla 2y ago
    Facebook has to abide to the local laws.
  - TimPC 2y ago
    You probably don’t ban Facebook as a whole but if they fail to crack down on gambling links that violate advertising laws or allow gambling companies to advertise in spite of those laws they probably face heavy fines from regulators.
    - mminer237 2y ago
      I think the issue he's raising is how you define advertising though. Is texting your friend a link advertising? What about posting a link on a forum? On Wikipedia? On your portfolio? On your footer? On your nav bar? I think everyone agrees the name should not be damnatio memoriae nor should you be able to link to a click-wrapper, but people will always push the gray area in between as far as they can for that kind of money.

BobbyJo 2y ago

> There is a broad spectrum of other options in between those points that tend to be under-discussed. Where we fall on that spectrum is generally a matter of culture, rather than regulation. American culture is one of maximalism, especially when it comes to commercialization.

eesmith 2y ago
Regulation is the enforcement and control of culture. They cannot really be disentangled. American culture is not one of maximalism. Going overseas I was surprised to see tobacco products and beer legal at 16 or 18, people drinking alcohol in the open at parks, soft-porn on late-night broadcast TV, and newsstands with uncovered porn magazines. All of which are commercialization. Further, a maximalism interpretation can't be used to understand American culture pre-1974, when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibited banks from preventing women from getting a bank account, nor pre-1964, when the Civil Rights Act prohibited most businesses from preventing blacks from exercising the same commercial maximalism as whites.
- BobbyJo 2y ago
  I am pointing out that, the moment betting and marijuana got the "you can profit from this" nod, money poured in and profit seeking explodes. Build! Advertise! Build! Advertise! This is the American way. Capital circles potential profits like vultures waiting for regulation to die. I don't think many other countries' private markets act as extreme in this regard. >All of which are commercialization I feel like those are just cultural norms as opposed to commercialization pressure. > Further, a maximalism interpretation can't be used to understand American culture pre-1974, when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act prohibited banks from preventing women from getting a bank account, nor pre-1964, when the Civil Rights Act prohibited most businesses from preventing blacks from exercising the same commercial maximalism as whites. I am failing to draw a line from your point to your argument here. I was referring to commercial maximalism, not sexual and racial equality maximalism.
  - eesmith 2y ago

fredgrott 2y ago

cannabis not a good example as it is still criminalize at Fed level including earning money in that industry and putting it in a federal licensed bank...

DrBazza 2y ago

I absolutely hate that gambling adverts on TV are legal in the UK. I've seen at least one friend's life ruined because of it. 9pm, and it's wall-to-wall. Ironically, this is around the same time as bans on smoking in pubs, and tobacco advertising became draconian. But gambling doesn't do any first-order physical harm, so it's all good, right? Seeing betting firms on the front of football teams' shirts offends me. > When Tony Blair's Labour government introduced the Gambling Act in 2005, it allowed gambling firms to advertise sports betting, poker and online casinos on TV and radio for the first time. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64510095 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64510095

Pufferbo 2y ago
Whenever I’m introduce a friend to the JLeague, 90% of the time the first they compliment is the lack of gambling adds. It really is a breath of fresh air. And I believe that if the JLegaue used this point in its international marketing, it would work to get a lot of people tired of gambling ads to want to follow the league.
- Marsymars 2y ago
  It’s also unfortunately a problem in niche sports that don’t really have international gambling-ad-free leagues. e.g. If you want to watch professional curling, your options are pretty slim, and they’re gambling sponsored. The curling community is also pretty small, so even though I’m nowhere near pro-level, I overlap with some of them - would be disappointing if I couldn’t watch the events with curlers from my city/country.
34679 2y ago
Bans cost money to enforce, while diminishing personal choice and responsibility. Why not spend that money on education instead? I've not had an ad in my home or on my mobile devices for well over a decade, and I've spent exactly zero on additional hardware to make that happen. It takes less than 10 minutes to configure a new device to be completely ad-free. I won't purchase anything that can't be configured to be free of ads, including smart TVs and iPhones. I still watch whatever content I want on my TV via HDMI from a PC. If our governments are going to be involved, their focus should be on teaching people how to do what people like me do. It's not difficult.

lumb63 2y ago

I was a big proponent of legalizing sports gambling before it happened here in the US. After that, one of my best friends lost 5 figures on sports gambling that he really couldn’t afford to lose. I’ve also watched sports talk shows degrade to simple betting tips, and TV is now borderline unwatchable due to the pharmaceutical and gambling ads. To me, a few regulations/restrictions seem useful. I think broad legalization went too far. One regulation would be banning gambling advertising, for the same reason why smoking ads are (I think?) banned. It is especially nefarious how companies lure in new customers with free bets, often with unscrupulous cash-out conditions, in order to get people hooked. It’s the equivalent of ads providing someone a coupon code to get several boxes of free cigarettes, at which point they get hooked. Another change I’d like to see is the end of mobile gambling. I’ve never done it, but from watching friends do it, it was far too easy to deposit money, or borrow money on credit, and bet it frivolously. At least if such behavior is confined to a casino, there is some larger barrier to entry for people. I do not know if this is true in other states, but certain states have the ability for an individual to self-institute a gambling ban at all facilities in the state. I’m not sure if this applies to gambling online. If not, then it should. And if other states don’t have it, then they would greatly benefit from it. It also seems somewhat fair to me to tax the casinos and other companies profiting from gambling and using that money to fund services for people who become addicted. If you’re going to help create a problem, you should have to help clean it up.

bombcar 2y ago
Requiring gambling to be done at established facilities or even the sports facility itself and limiting the bets to five dollars or some nominal amount would solve 99% of the problems.
- verdverm 2y ago
  Limiting it to a licensed location, instead of app or website, and requiring cash instead of credit would likely be sufficient.
  - gosub100 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

DoubleGlazing 2y ago

I live in Dublin where a lot of the tech developement centres for many online bookmaker and casinos are based. I have been approached by recruiters for some of them and even though they offer VERY generous packages I refuse to work for them on moral grounds. The thing that bothers me the most is that they know a lot of poitential employees have issues with the whole sector, so they try to give it a false veneer of acceptability. A good example of that was that both Paddy Power and Boyle Sports referred to themselves as suppliers of "risk-based entertainment" in their recruitment literature, something I found to be very sleazy. I also know people who work for some of these companies and they tell me that all their talk about caring for problem gamblers is complete nonsense and that they actively seek ways to lure back problem gamblers who were able to quit. It's also very weird that as governments around the world are cracking down on alcohol poromotion at the same time they seem to be encouraging the promotion of gambling. I would say gambling can do as much harm to a family as alcohol addiction can. I'm frankly shocked at the amount of gambling adverts there are these days. And so many of them carry the subtle sub-text that if you don't bet on your team then you aren't a true fan. The problem is that people will gamble no matter what, so providing a safe way to do so is better than banning it. I agree with you that it's all about to what degree you allow gambling. At the very least I would ban advertising as it's effectively normalising something that most definitely should not be normalised.

xhkkffbf 2y ago
Gambling isn't the only form of entertainment meant to tickle the part of the brain that craves risk. Movies have car chases. Amusement parks have roller coasters. And many jobs involve taking risks. Investment houses. Sales. etc. We reward those who take risks because society (often) benefits. I find it much easier to argue against standard casino games because it's pretty easy to mathematically prove that the gambler will end up broke. With sports, it's a bit harder. As long as the vig is small enough, smart gamblers who know the teams can eke out a profit. If anything, sports gambling rewards study, thought, and focus, all things we should celebrate. THat doesn't mean I like. I would like to see it banned. But it means I have trouble arguing against it with any vigor.
- 2y ago

kqr 2y ago

Right -- this is much like alcohol, something which is roughly as dangerous as gambling -- but also as enjoyable to people who can do it responsibly. It's not a choice between prohibition and selling it in the grocery store. There are many nuances in between.

sidewndr46 2y ago

States changed their laws around cannabis as a measure to gather votes and to increase tax revenues. Theories of markets and economics have little to do with it.

wyldfire 2y ago

> You can ban gambling advertising, as Italy did in 2019 The US already has plenty of legislation regulating advertisements of other vices, so I think a similar ban is totally appropriate here.

Biologist123 2y ago

Good luck with all your less profitable options: have a look at how much lobbying the sector does.

piltdownman 2y ago

Pre 1970s it was something you did at the on-track TOTE and in Bingo Halls/Working Mens Clubs. Games of skill with money wagered have always been a significant part of Western European society, starting with the Equestrian Aristocratic classes and funnelling all the way down to the 'Football Pools' and the national pastimes of putting a wager down for the Grand National or Cheltenham festivals, legitimised by social events like Ladies Day or Student Race Week. There are multiple ways of 'fairer' gambling - exchange markets like Betfair rather than sportsbook being the current epitome. The main issue is lack of legislation around targeting vulnerable demographics and those suffering from addictive traits - and that's an advertising rather than a gambling issue.

fennecfoxy 2y ago

Technology is the tool that magnifies both good and bad things. It's up to us to prevent bad things at the source, not ban the tool; it's the social media problem, really.

BobAliceInATree 2y ago

Every state is supposed to be a "laboratory" of democracy, but we really screwed the pooch with cannabis legalization. At least one state should have gone the way with absolutely zero marketing allowed (like tobacco currently is), and all containers should be in standardized, sterile, black & white containers, with only the name & description of the product, and big warnings describing the dangers (like cigarette packs in Australia). 24 legalized states, and not one chose this approach which is a shame.

olyjohn 2y ago
They're not cigarettes. Nobody is sitting down and smoking 40 joints a day. What serious dangers are there besides the fact that you might eat the entire bag of Doritos while watching Planet Earth?
- alan-crowe 2y ago
  The important context is that life is short, just seventy years, and has stages, your early twenties are a magical time. Losing your ambition and wasting your early twenties are a subtle danger, but nevertheless a serious danger.
  - ThunderSizzle 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - lotsofpulp 2y ago
    One of the more ridiculous assertions I have seen, as if cannabis causes people to lose ambitions, any more than a million other things that can happen in society. You know, like wage stagnation in the face of skyrocketing real estate costs.
    - mensetmanusman 2y ago
      The high levels of thc concentration make the new drugs ‘not your dad’s weed’

NemoNobody 2y ago

It's like you let the kids play with fire but then you make sure to have the first aid kits ready.

biorach 2y ago

> There's a false dichotomy between prohibition and laissez-faire, which the US seems particularly prone to. Nicely put

SunlitCat 2y ago

> There's a false dichotomy between prohibition and laissez-faire, which the US seems particularly prone to. You are raising an interesting question there. I always wondered why in US many things have to be either Yes or Now, Good or Bad, Black or White, Left or Right, Up or Down and so on. No (or very few) things, opinions or anything in between.

amelius 2y ago
Democrats or Republicans. With only two choices for everything the country is set up for polarization.

dylan604 2y ago

> in this country until 2005, when regulations were substantially liberalised I've always found it very striking when the sports team jersey sponsers are betting companies.

Carport7829 2y ago

Gambling - Causing harm since (at least) the Iron Age. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_Lament https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_Lament