4 ms·

If you knew for a fact that gambling was a significant net negative to society (ie, even when you take into account illicit gambling etc), would you support its

If you knew for a fact that gambling was a significant net negative to society (ie, even when you take into account illicit gambling etc), would you support its ban?

skippyboxedhero 1y ago
That is like saying if you knew heroin was good then would you support giving it to children? Asking this question is a sign that you aren't interested in the answer.
sokoloff 1y ago
I believe that alcohol and tobacco are significant net negatives to society. Yet, I do not support a ban on alcohol and I suspect that an outright ban on tobacco would be worse than simply having high taxes on it. Sports betting is probably closest to alcohol in this regard: lots of people get moderate enjoyment from it from time to time and some people have their lives significantly harmed or even ended, meaning the overall net is negative, even though many people experience a small positive. I wouldn’t ban sports betting for the same reason I wouldn’t take away your glass of red wine with dinner.
coolestguy 1y ago
There are a lot of things that are a net negative to society but since we're not slaves, we're allowed to do things that can be fun but -ev if we choose to
- EnPissant 1y ago
  Are you opposed to any or all of the following things? - Seat belt laws - Prescription requirements for drugs (whether that be Oxytocin or blood pressure medication) - Building codes - Minimum wage
  - sokoloff 1y ago
    I wear my seatbelt and insist my family does the same, but am opposed to seat belt laws. I’m in favor of building codes for commercial and public buildings but not for detached private residences (or not at the current level anyway). I’m opposed to minimum wage laws. For oxytocin, I think people derive pleasure and overall significantly benefit from it and naturally encourage people to seek it out, despite it having a positive feedback loop in its mode of action. Used under a doctor’s care and oversight, for patients where a prescription is indicated, benefits are well in excess of side effects. Maintaining the requirement for a prescription is fine. Medicines for blood pressure management are likewise overwhelmingly beneficial, and so I want them to also be highly available to anyone for whom they’re indicated, though I think having a doctor in the loop to monitor is appropriate and needing a prescription is therefore fine.

If you knew for a fact that gambling was a significant net negative to society (ie, even when you take into account illicit gambling etc), would you support its ban?

skippyboxedhero 1y ago

That is like saying if you knew heroin was good then would you support giving it to children? Asking this question is a sign that you aren't interested in the answer.

sokoloff 1y ago

I believe that alcohol and tobacco are significant net negatives to society. Yet, I do not support a ban on alcohol and I suspect that an outright ban on tobacco would be worse than simply having high taxes on it. Sports betting is probably closest to alcohol in this regard: lots of people get moderate enjoyment from it from time to time and some people have their lives significantly harmed or even ended, meaning the overall net is negative, even though many people experience a small positive. I wouldn’t ban sports betting for the same reason I wouldn’t take away your glass of red wine with dinner.

coolestguy 1y ago

There are a lot of things that are a net negative to society but since we're not slaves, we're allowed to do things that can be fun but -ev if we choose to

EnPissant 1y ago
Are you opposed to any or all of the following things? - Seat belt laws - Prescription requirements for drugs (whether that be Oxytocin or blood pressure medication) - Building codes - Minimum wage
- sokoloff 1y ago
  I wear my seatbelt and insist my family does the same, but am opposed to seat belt laws. I’m in favor of building codes for commercial and public buildings but not for detached private residences (or not at the current level anyway). I’m opposed to minimum wage laws. For oxytocin, I think people derive pleasure and overall significantly benefit from it and naturally encourage people to seek it out, despite it having a positive feedback loop in its mode of action. Used under a doctor’s care and oversight, for patients where a prescription is indicated, benefits are well in excess of side effects. Maintaining the requirement for a prescription is fine. Medicines for blood pressure management are likewise overwhelmingly beneficial, and so I want them to also be highly available to anyone for whom they’re indicated, though I think having a doctor in the loop to monitor is appropriate and needing a prescription is therefore fine.