5 ms·

I would say gambling in itself isnt immoral. The problem is that a small % of people get addicted and end up spending all their money and more on betting. And t

I would say gambling in itself isnt immoral. The problem is that a small % of people get addicted and end up spending all their money and more on betting. And that the industry makes almost all their profits on those that are addicted.

keiferski 1y ago
Sure, we could get into a discussion on the morality of gambling itself, but if we look at pretty much every global ethical tradition (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, etc.) it is frowned upon strongly. It seems to me like widespread gambling = negative social effects is a pretty widespread, obvious conclusion that most civilizations have reached. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling#Religious_views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling#Religious_views
- 1659447091 1y ago
  From the wiki page, Christianity from the bible's perspective doesn't have a problem with gambling itself: > Although the bible does not condemn gambling, instead the desire to get rich is called to account numerous times in the New Testament. And the Catholic's problem with it is the competition: > Some parish pastors have also opposed casinos for the additional reason that they would take customers away from church bingo and annual festivals where games such as blackjack, roulette, craps, and poker are used for fundraising.
  - keiferski 1y ago
    You left out the entire first half of the section on Catholicism, which is an extremely misleading move on your part: The Catholic Church holds the position that there is no moral impediment to gambling, so long as it is fair, all bettors have a reasonable chance of winning, there is no fraud involved, and the parties involved do not have actual knowledge of the outcome of the bet (unless they have disclosed this knowledge),[33] and as long as the following conditions are met: the gambler can afford to lose the bet, and stops when the limit is reached, and the motivation is entertainment and not personal gain leading to the "love of money"[34] or making a living. In general, Catholic bishops have opposed casino gambling on the grounds that it too often tempts people into problem gambling or addiction, and has particularly negative effects on poor people; they sometimes also cite secondary effects such as increases in loan sharking, prostitution, corruption, and general public immorality
    - 1659447091 1y ago
      > which is an extremely misleading move on your part No, I was pointing out the hypocrisy with the Catholic view. You are adding to what I pointing out about the wiki and Christianity generally not having a problem with gambling itself: "The Catholic Church holds the position that there is no moral impediment to gambling" -- again no moral issue with gambling itself. Your source to back up your argument is simply not what you made it out to be.
      - keiferski 1y ago
        I think it’s fair to say that the Catholic opinion is very much against the type of widespread gambling that is prevalent today, especially in the sense of it having negative social effects. I don’t think that is hypocritical, more just nuanced. Church bingos aren’t putting people into poverty. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm Your critique of my initial comment seems to be hinging on the single phrase of gambling itself. I just meant the commonly used sense of the word, today, which IMO implies the aspects that the Catholics label as negative. (I.e. most people don’t call bingo a gambling activity.) But sure, Catholicism has a nuanced view and it’s inaccurate to say they are against gambling in itself.
        1659447091 1y ago
        The post of your I replied to with the source says > Sure, we could get into a discussion on the morality of gambling itself, but if we look at pretty much every global ethical tradition (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, etc.) it is frowned upon strongly. Yes, that was how it reads to me, that gambling itself is frowned on; based on the post that reply was for where they stated "I would say gambling in itself isnt immoral." and that the problem is addiction and money. And I also agree with that. But gambling is gambling and while no part of it is immoral to me (I hold higher standards for that word), there are major issues with it due to greed. Which is what your souce is saying Christians have a problem with, not it being widespread or happening at all -- simply the trying to get rich, the addiction to money -- thats the sin. Not gambling, gambling is fine; it's when it turn into a money issue, then there is a problem. And that can happen at your local bingo parlour or Macau, or Vegas or the back-room of a gas station or your buddy's poker game. The Christian bible/church have an issue when greed happens, not gambling (widespread or not).
- kqr 1y ago
  > widespread gambling = negative social effects Though this is conflating correlation for causation. As you note yourself in GP, dire social conditions is what makes people see gambling (or risk-taking more generally) as one of the only viable options to get out.
  - hollerith 1y ago
    Just because the causation goes one way doesn't mean it cannot go the other way, too. We call those vicious cycles.
    - kqr 1y ago
      Yeah but those are separate claims. "Lead causes health problem, and vicious cycles are a thing, therefore health problems cause lead!" is not a valid shape for an argument. It may well be true, but both directions have to be established before calling it a vicious cycle. In this case, I can agree bad social conditions cause gambling, but I don't think the data supports the opposite, at least not more than many other things we take for granted, such as - alcohol, - beauty/fashion industries, - social media, etc.
      - wredcoll 1y ago
        You don't think gambling causes negative societal affects to any greater degree than the fashion industry?
        kqr 1y ago
        I've not heard any convincing arguments in favour of that hypothesis, no. Have you met young women? They self-harm over unrealistic ideals.
      - hollerith 1y ago
        Cause-and-effect relationships can be complicated and it is important not to jump to conclusions, but do you deny that there are millions of Americans who can correctly identify an addiction when they see it in someone they have some sort of ongoing relationshp with (either because they have training and experience in treating addiction or because they themselves or someone close to them were once addicted)? Do you deny that those observers can correctly identify the substance or the activity that the addict is addicted to? Do you deny that addiction is quite deleterious both to the addict and to the people with whom the addict is in some kind of relationship? Many news stories claim that many Americans (young men particularly) are getting addicted to online sports betting. Do you dispute the accuracy of those news stories? If so, can you guess as to the motivation for publishing these inaccurate news stories? Often a campaign to mislead the public is done because some group would gain something quite valuable if the campaign is successful. What would any group have to gain (aside from a slightly healthier country) from a successful campaign to make online sports betting illegal?
- WillAdams 1y ago
  Moreover, one simply needs to look at which games casinos select to see how not only does the house always win, but it chooses to win more and entertain less --- Faro was once a popular game, and by all accounts is a great deal of fun to play, but a Faro table does not make as much money for the house as Blackjack and other games, so one doesn't see them in casinos these days.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- sigwinch 1y ago
  In the Abrahamic tradition, seeking benefit by avoiding labor is sinful. I don’t think it needs to be widespread to serve as an example. One data point that widespread gambling was eroding norms was that professional gamblers could not give testimony.
  - singlepaynews 1y ago
    OK, so what is to be done when access to labor is gatekept? If you can't have a job, or can't benefit from a job beyond "give a man a fish, he eats for a day", are you not meant to look for an opportunity to generate income outside of working?
    - huhkerrf 1y ago
      > OK, so what is to be done when access to labor is gatekept? The unemployment rate in the US is 4.3%. Before you say anything, the U-6 rate is 8.1%.
      - singlepaynews 1y ago
        Okay, so 30 million people, or more conservatively 16 million people. Same question, and before you say anything, don't be condescending. ETA: Maybe most conservatively, let's use only the % uniquely included in U-6 and excluded in standard, or 14.4 million people. I'll claim these 14m people are the "gatekept from full employment" in that they don't qualify as narrowly unemployed unless you include "all people marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons"(1) Same question. 14m people who are being excluded from labor, are they not free to attempt to generate income via means other than labor, lest they suffer the judgement of Abraham? In other words, is Abraham hiring? If not, are the people he refuses to employ meant to accept serfdom to preserve their soul? (1):https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
        huhkerrf 1y ago
        >Same question. 14m people who are being excluded from labor, are they not free to attempt to generate income via means other than labor, lest they suffer the judgement of Abraham? This makes no sense. Is it really your claim that 14 million people are kept from working? Do you know what the long term unemployment rate is in the US?
- victorbjorklund 1y ago
  Homosexuality and lots of other things were frowned upon by lots of religions. We probably should not base our morality on thousands of year old religions.
tgv 1y ago
Gambling (without very strict rules) has a net negative outcome. You're not doing anything valuable, nor neutral, by gambling. So it could well be viewed as immoral.
- StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  Gambling is addictive because it gives you a dopamine rush. That’s why people gamble because it’s actually enjoyable. I personally don’t see the argument for categorising it as immoral on the basis that’s it’s not useful. The same could be said about plenty of other enjoyable things. However exploitation is clearly immoral. That’s where I have issue with gambling. Gambling operators don’t get rich thanks to the average users but because addicts give them much more than they should. That’s clearly immoral be it from a casino, a gambling website, or micro transactions in mobile game. Every companies which profit from that should be held accountable including Apple and Google which are clearly complicit.
  - tgv 1y ago
    It was more to provide an alternative to the parent's remark that it isn't. I fully agree that its exploitation is by far the greater evil. I do not concur on the dopamine argument. There's no solid evidence for it. The underlying mechanism is probably much more complex. But since we're not discussing a signal path to addiction, it's an unnecessary complication of the argument that instills the belief that there's a medical cure.
  - hollerith 1y ago
    Most Americans regard as immoral any substance or activity to which ordinary people become addicted at a significant rate. Addiction breaks social ties. For example, when an addict starts to struggle to continue to pay for his addiction, he often starts to steal from friends and family members. The average view on this on HN is quite different from the American average. Personality psychologists have observed that people who do well in software development and entrepreneurship tend to be high in a trait called "openness to experience". Maybe HNers are more tolerant of addictive substances and activities than the American average because addictive substances and activities tend to be interesting experiences. (I am restricting my universe of discourse here to the US only because it is the country I know best.)
mrweasel 1y ago
When Denmark liberalized gambling small "casinos" with slot machines and sports betting started to pop up everywhere. Those wouldn't be an issue if it was regular people popping Friday afternoon to get a coffee and spend $10 - $20 on the slot machines and perhaps put down a few bucks on this weekends big game, but you're right, it no. The addicts and lonely line up waiting for these places to open, they spend everything they've got and the gambling places encourage it by providing them with free coffee, snacks and in some cases dinner. No, gambling isn't immoral, but praying on the addicts, the mentally challenge and the lonely is. If you can't stay in business without exploiting the weak, you have no right to exist. The only negative consequence I see from banning gambling is the potential dangers of a black market.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- hardlianotion 1y ago
  And that is demonstrably very high.
bhc 1y ago
The gambling industry has funneled a ton of cash into academic researchers producing papers that gave credence to the idea of "addictive personality," which in turn was massaged by PR experts into the notion that some people are just born addicts, and the gambling industry can't help it if they become addicted to gambling too. "Addictive personality" itself is on very shaky grounds statistically, and the derived PR messaging certainly is false. The gambling industry is likely more culpable in this mess than even a typical, generally well-informed person might be aware.
- Theodores 1y ago
  "Addictive personality", now there is a deprecated phrase! In drug rehabilitation, the phrase is no longer used. Instead people have a bingo card of disease, conditions and syndromes to go with addiction. Once people have been pigeon-holed in a dozen ways then the die is cast, these conditions are no longer imaginary, you have to hold yourself up in life because X, Y and Z prohibit you from even giving it a go. Regarding the article, I detest organised gambling, however, relatively few chronic gamblers end up homeless and destitute. You need a good dose of class A drugs and a smorgasbord of childhood trauma to guarantee the truly negative outcomes. I don't object to gambling amongst friends, even if it is on a card game. I might bet someone that they can't beat me on Scrabble, but I would be getting the dopamine hits from laying some massive, high-scoring words on the board to devastate my fellow players, but winning that £10 just ups the stakes and my competitive drive. If I am just betting on a sport (or even a Scrabble game) played by others, then it isn't quite the same. What does amaze me about modern day gambling is that you know it is rigged. I don't trust an app to honestly flip a coin for me. My version of the app would be 'if heads show tails and vice-versa most of the time'. Yet people pour their life savings and some more into apps that are black boxes with no way of peeking inside to see how it works. The seasoned gambler must know that every game is rigged and that the house always wins, but they still queue up for another spin.
  - lux-lux-lux 1y ago
    In terms of negative outcomes - suicidality, etc. - problem gambling is roughly equivalent to an opioid abuse or meth.
axus 1y ago
Selling a product or service to its addicts is immoral. Consumption isn't, its just stupid
b00ty4breakfast 1y ago
The chicken farmer necessarily seeks out the chickens that lay the most eggs, because that's how he makes his living. In an economy that incentivizes the highest profit-margins, this exploitation becomes intrinsic to the operation of a gambling establishment sans regulations that prevent it. Games of chance and friendly wagers amongst friends may not, in themselves be immoral or harmful but gambling as an organized business activity is absolutely harmful

keiferski 1y ago

Sure, we could get into a discussion on the morality of gambling itself, but if we look at pretty much every global ethical tradition (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, etc.) it is frowned upon strongly. It seems to me like widespread gambling = negative social effects is a pretty widespread, obvious conclusion that most civilizations have reached. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling#Religious_views https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambling#Religious_views

1659447091 1y ago
From the wiki page, Christianity from the bible's perspective doesn't have a problem with gambling itself: > Although the bible does not condemn gambling, instead the desire to get rich is called to account numerous times in the New Testament. And the Catholic's problem with it is the competition: > Some parish pastors have also opposed casinos for the additional reason that they would take customers away from church bingo and annual festivals where games such as blackjack, roulette, craps, and poker are used for fundraising.
- keiferski 1y ago
  You left out the entire first half of the section on Catholicism, which is an extremely misleading move on your part: The Catholic Church holds the position that there is no moral impediment to gambling, so long as it is fair, all bettors have a reasonable chance of winning, there is no fraud involved, and the parties involved do not have actual knowledge of the outcome of the bet (unless they have disclosed this knowledge),[33] and as long as the following conditions are met: the gambler can afford to lose the bet, and stops when the limit is reached, and the motivation is entertainment and not personal gain leading to the "love of money"[34] or making a living. In general, Catholic bishops have opposed casino gambling on the grounds that it too often tempts people into problem gambling or addiction, and has particularly negative effects on poor people; they sometimes also cite secondary effects such as increases in loan sharking, prostitution, corruption, and general public immorality
  - 1659447091 1y ago
    > which is an extremely misleading move on your part No, I was pointing out the hypocrisy with the Catholic view. You are adding to what I pointing out about the wiki and Christianity generally not having a problem with gambling itself: "The Catholic Church holds the position that there is no moral impediment to gambling" -- again no moral issue with gambling itself. Your source to back up your argument is simply not what you made it out to be.
    - keiferski 1y ago
      I think it’s fair to say that the Catholic opinion is very much against the type of widespread gambling that is prevalent today, especially in the sense of it having negative social effects. I don’t think that is hypocritical, more just nuanced. Church bingos aren’t putting people into poverty. https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06375b.htm Your critique of my initial comment seems to be hinging on the single phrase of gambling itself. I just meant the commonly used sense of the word, today, which IMO implies the aspects that the Catholics label as negative. (I.e. most people don’t call bingo a gambling activity.) But sure, Catholicism has a nuanced view and it’s inaccurate to say they are against gambling in itself.
      - 1659447091 1y ago
        The post of your I replied to with the source says > Sure, we could get into a discussion on the morality of gambling itself, but if we look at pretty much every global ethical tradition (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, etc.) it is frowned upon strongly. Yes, that was how it reads to me, that gambling itself is frowned on; based on the post that reply was for where they stated "I would say gambling in itself isnt immoral." and that the problem is addiction and money. And I also agree with that. But gambling is gambling and while no part of it is immoral to me (I hold higher standards for that word), there are major issues with it due to greed. Which is what your souce is saying Christians have a problem with, not it being widespread or happening at all -- simply the trying to get rich, the addiction to money -- thats the sin. Not gambling, gambling is fine; it's when it turn into a money issue, then there is a problem. And that can happen at your local bingo parlour or Macau, or Vegas or the back-room of a gas station or your buddy's poker game. The Christian bible/church have an issue when greed happens, not gambling (widespread or not).
kqr 1y ago
> widespread gambling = negative social effects Though this is conflating correlation for causation. As you note yourself in GP, dire social conditions is what makes people see gambling (or risk-taking more generally) as one of the only viable options to get out.
- hollerith 1y ago
  Just because the causation goes one way doesn't mean it cannot go the other way, too. We call those vicious cycles.
  - kqr 1y ago
    Yeah but those are separate claims. "Lead causes health problem, and vicious cycles are a thing, therefore health problems cause lead!" is not a valid shape for an argument. It may well be true, but both directions have to be established before calling it a vicious cycle. In this case, I can agree bad social conditions cause gambling, but I don't think the data supports the opposite, at least not more than many other things we take for granted, such as - alcohol, - beauty/fashion industries, - social media, etc.
    - wredcoll 1y ago
      You don't think gambling causes negative societal affects to any greater degree than the fashion industry?
      - kqr 1y ago
        I've not heard any convincing arguments in favour of that hypothesis, no. Have you met young women? They self-harm over unrealistic ideals.
    - hollerith 1y ago
      Cause-and-effect relationships can be complicated and it is important not to jump to conclusions, but do you deny that there are millions of Americans who can correctly identify an addiction when they see it in someone they have some sort of ongoing relationshp with (either because they have training and experience in treating addiction or because they themselves or someone close to them were once addicted)? Do you deny that those observers can correctly identify the substance or the activity that the addict is addicted to? Do you deny that addiction is quite deleterious both to the addict and to the people with whom the addict is in some kind of relationship? Many news stories claim that many Americans (young men particularly) are getting addicted to online sports betting. Do you dispute the accuracy of those news stories? If so, can you guess as to the motivation for publishing these inaccurate news stories? Often a campaign to mislead the public is done because some group would gain something quite valuable if the campaign is successful. What would any group have to gain (aside from a slightly healthier country) from a successful campaign to make online sports betting illegal?
WillAdams 1y ago
Moreover, one simply needs to look at which games casinos select to see how not only does the house always win, but it chooses to win more and entertain less --- Faro was once a popular game, and by all accounts is a great deal of fun to play, but a Faro table does not make as much money for the house as Blackjack and other games, so one doesn't see them in casinos these days.
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
sigwinch 1y ago
In the Abrahamic tradition, seeking benefit by avoiding labor is sinful. I don’t think it needs to be widespread to serve as an example. One data point that widespread gambling was eroding norms was that professional gamblers could not give testimony.
- singlepaynews 1y ago
  OK, so what is to be done when access to labor is gatekept? If you can't have a job, or can't benefit from a job beyond "give a man a fish, he eats for a day", are you not meant to look for an opportunity to generate income outside of working?
  - huhkerrf 1y ago
    > OK, so what is to be done when access to labor is gatekept? The unemployment rate in the US is 4.3%. Before you say anything, the U-6 rate is 8.1%.
    - singlepaynews 1y ago
      Okay, so 30 million people, or more conservatively 16 million people. Same question, and before you say anything, don't be condescending. ETA: Maybe most conservatively, let's use only the % uniquely included in U-6 and excluded in standard, or 14.4 million people. I'll claim these 14m people are the "gatekept from full employment" in that they don't qualify as narrowly unemployed unless you include "all people marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons"(1) Same question. 14m people who are being excluded from labor, are they not free to attempt to generate income via means other than labor, lest they suffer the judgement of Abraham? In other words, is Abraham hiring? If not, are the people he refuses to employ meant to accept serfdom to preserve their soul? (1):https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
      - huhkerrf 1y ago
        >Same question. 14m people who are being excluded from labor, are they not free to attempt to generate income via means other than labor, lest they suffer the judgement of Abraham? This makes no sense. Is it really your claim that 14 million people are kept from working? Do you know what the long term unemployment rate is in the US?
victorbjorklund 1y ago
Homosexuality and lots of other things were frowned upon by lots of religions. We probably should not base our morality on thousands of year old religions.

tgv 1y ago

Gambling (without very strict rules) has a net negative outcome. You're not doing anything valuable, nor neutral, by gambling. So it could well be viewed as immoral.

StopDisinfo910 1y ago
Gambling is addictive because it gives you a dopamine rush. That’s why people gamble because it’s actually enjoyable. I personally don’t see the argument for categorising it as immoral on the basis that’s it’s not useful. The same could be said about plenty of other enjoyable things. However exploitation is clearly immoral. That’s where I have issue with gambling. Gambling operators don’t get rich thanks to the average users but because addicts give them much more than they should. That’s clearly immoral be it from a casino, a gambling website, or micro transactions in mobile game. Every companies which profit from that should be held accountable including Apple and Google which are clearly complicit.
- tgv 1y ago
  It was more to provide an alternative to the parent's remark that it isn't. I fully agree that its exploitation is by far the greater evil. I do not concur on the dopamine argument. There's no solid evidence for it. The underlying mechanism is probably much more complex. But since we're not discussing a signal path to addiction, it's an unnecessary complication of the argument that instills the belief that there's a medical cure.
- hollerith 1y ago
  Most Americans regard as immoral any substance or activity to which ordinary people become addicted at a significant rate. Addiction breaks social ties. For example, when an addict starts to struggle to continue to pay for his addiction, he often starts to steal from friends and family members. The average view on this on HN is quite different from the American average. Personality psychologists have observed that people who do well in software development and entrepreneurship tend to be high in a trait called "openness to experience". Maybe HNers are more tolerant of addictive substances and activities than the American average because addictive substances and activities tend to be interesting experiences. (I am restricting my universe of discourse here to the US only because it is the country I know best.)

mrweasel 1y ago

When Denmark liberalized gambling small "casinos" with slot machines and sports betting started to pop up everywhere. Those wouldn't be an issue if it was regular people popping Friday afternoon to get a coffee and spend $10 - $20 on the slot machines and perhaps put down a few bucks on this weekends big game, but you're right, it no. The addicts and lonely line up waiting for these places to open, they spend everything they've got and the gambling places encourage it by providing them with free coffee, snacks and in some cases dinner. No, gambling isn't immoral, but praying on the addicts, the mentally challenge and the lonely is. If you can't stay in business without exploiting the weak, you have no right to exist. The only negative consequence I see from banning gambling is the potential dangers of a black market.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
hardlianotion 1y ago
And that is demonstrably very high.

bhc 1y ago

The gambling industry has funneled a ton of cash into academic researchers producing papers that gave credence to the idea of "addictive personality," which in turn was massaged by PR experts into the notion that some people are just born addicts, and the gambling industry can't help it if they become addicted to gambling too. "Addictive personality" itself is on very shaky grounds statistically, and the derived PR messaging certainly is false. The gambling industry is likely more culpable in this mess than even a typical, generally well-informed person might be aware.

Theodores 1y ago
"Addictive personality", now there is a deprecated phrase! In drug rehabilitation, the phrase is no longer used. Instead people have a bingo card of disease, conditions and syndromes to go with addiction. Once people have been pigeon-holed in a dozen ways then the die is cast, these conditions are no longer imaginary, you have to hold yourself up in life because X, Y and Z prohibit you from even giving it a go. Regarding the article, I detest organised gambling, however, relatively few chronic gamblers end up homeless and destitute. You need a good dose of class A drugs and a smorgasbord of childhood trauma to guarantee the truly negative outcomes. I don't object to gambling amongst friends, even if it is on a card game. I might bet someone that they can't beat me on Scrabble, but I would be getting the dopamine hits from laying some massive, high-scoring words on the board to devastate my fellow players, but winning that £10 just ups the stakes and my competitive drive. If I am just betting on a sport (or even a Scrabble game) played by others, then it isn't quite the same. What does amaze me about modern day gambling is that you know it is rigged. I don't trust an app to honestly flip a coin for me. My version of the app would be 'if heads show tails and vice-versa most of the time'. Yet people pour their life savings and some more into apps that are black boxes with no way of peeking inside to see how it works. The seasoned gambler must know that every game is rigged and that the house always wins, but they still queue up for another spin.
- lux-lux-lux 1y ago
  In terms of negative outcomes - suicidality, etc. - problem gambling is roughly equivalent to an opioid abuse or meth.

axus 1y ago

Selling a product or service to its addicts is immoral. Consumption isn't, its just stupid

b00ty4breakfast 1y ago

The chicken farmer necessarily seeks out the chickens that lay the most eggs, because that's how he makes his living. In an economy that incentivizes the highest profit-margins, this exploitation becomes intrinsic to the operation of a gambling establishment sans regulations that prevent it. Games of chance and friendly wagers amongst friends may not, in themselves be immoral or harmful but gambling as an organized business activity is absolutely harmful