3 ms·

A state is funding essential public services not through productive economic activity, but by extracting money from people losing bets

by TimByte 11mo ago

harha 11mo ago
Sounds like a win to me, you can leave more for productive activity to grow and attract more, there less incentive for illegal gambling, and no one is forced to do it. If there’s a massive burden with addicts, you can still impose that the gambling industry pays more to offset.
- juliushuijnk 11mo ago
  The goal of the governement is to facilitate conditions where as many people as possible are happy, safe and healthy. The economy of a state is in service of that goal, not the other way around.
- MSFT_Edging 11mo ago
  > no one is forced to do it This logic always bugs me because no one truly lives in a vacuum. People are flawed and generally need help from a community. A small community can't really fight back a well endowed company like gambling companies. The whole(stated) reason android is losing unsigned side loading is because grandmas in SEA are sideloading gambling apps. It's obvious to me that gambling is generally a vulnerability in the human psyche. For many, it short circuits something in their brain and forms genuine addiction. It's actually insane to me to use this vulnerability as a tax base to fund roads and schools, because regardless of the funds, your incentives will still be perverse and those incentives will dictate that more people need to be losing their money to out-of-state firms because a small portion of it might fund roads and schools. The incentives basically state: "A percentage of our population must become sick and addicted to risk and reward in order for society to function". Is this not basically the concept of Omelas?
  - shadowgovt 11mo ago
    > The whole(stated) reason android is losing unsigned side loading is because grandmas in SEA are sideloading gambling apps. Do you have more details on this? I hadn't heard this angle on the story before. I'm mildly surprised this is a concern Google has to have.
    - MSFT_Edging 11mo ago
      I'd have to look for it. At the very least, the pilot program is happening there, and I've read on here it's a big scam to have sideloaded gambling apps take people's life savings.
  - jonahbenton 11mo ago
    I read the Omelas story differently but maybe is the same. It's just a predatory dominance play. Some people get the dopamine hit from dominance, so for them it is a double win- their stuff is funded by others and it is the "weakness" of others (perceived by the dominant) that produces the funding. Having and eating the cake, etc.
  - harha 11mo ago
    I think it’s worth considering the alternate scenario of banning it and it happening illegally, which arguably is a worse outcome. This adds to the burden of finding what to ban, which may be different depending on who you ask.
- BeFlatXIII 11mo ago
  > no one is forced to do it Go tell that to joint bank accounts and family court.
  - shadowgovt 11mo ago
    What does this comment mean?
    - jwiz 11mo ago
      If spouse-a has gambling addiction and spends all of the family money, then spouse-b was effectively forced to gamble.
  - falseprofit 11mo ago
    Not being forced to open a joint account either… In all seriousness, all the pushback against paternalism comes from people who still believe in free will.
    - BeFlatXIII 11mo ago
      Were the children able to choose to be affected by their parents’ poor decisions?
rcpt 11mo ago
Taxing productive economic activity is bad
- vinceguidry 11mo ago
  That's... kinda ridiculous? It sounds like you're just against taxation period. How should a government fund itself?
  - immibis 11mo ago
    Zero taxation is just as bad. There's a certain amount of taxation that has to be met, and it's best if it comes from as harmful activity as possible, because whatever gets taxed is discouraged. If there isn't enough harmful activity to meet tax needs, then start taxing normal activity.
    - majewsky 11mo ago
      > whatever gets taxed is discouraged Except when the behavior is too common, in which case it will become a relevant revenue source for the government, incentivizing them to encourage the vice. Case in point, here's the Japanese tax agency asking for ideas how to incentivize young people to drink more alcohol. https://soranews24.com/2022/08/17/japanese-government-worried-young-adults-arent-drinking-enough-alcohol/ https://soranews24.com/2022/08/17/japanese-government-worrie...
- stouset 11mo ago
  Having a government tax base funded significantly from the exploitation of addictive behavior and siphoning money away from productive consumptive purposes is also bad, but less easy to make a sound bite from.

A state is funding essential public services not through productive economic activity, but by extracting money from people losing bets

by TimByte 11mo ago

A state is funding essential public services not through productive economic activity, but by extracting money from people losing bets

harha 11mo ago

Sounds like a win to me, you can leave more for productive activity to grow and attract more, there less incentive for illegal gambling, and no one is forced to do it. If there’s a massive burden with addicts, you can still impose that the gambling industry pays more to offset.

juliushuijnk 11mo ago
The goal of the governement is to facilitate conditions where as many people as possible are happy, safe and healthy. The economy of a state is in service of that goal, not the other way around.
MSFT_Edging 11mo ago
> no one is forced to do it This logic always bugs me because no one truly lives in a vacuum. People are flawed and generally need help from a community. A small community can't really fight back a well endowed company like gambling companies. The whole(stated) reason android is losing unsigned side loading is because grandmas in SEA are sideloading gambling apps. It's obvious to me that gambling is generally a vulnerability in the human psyche. For many, it short circuits something in their brain and forms genuine addiction. It's actually insane to me to use this vulnerability as a tax base to fund roads and schools, because regardless of the funds, your incentives will still be perverse and those incentives will dictate that more people need to be losing their money to out-of-state firms because a small portion of it might fund roads and schools. The incentives basically state: "A percentage of our population must become sick and addicted to risk and reward in order for society to function". Is this not basically the concept of Omelas?
- shadowgovt 11mo ago
  > The whole(stated) reason android is losing unsigned side loading is because grandmas in SEA are sideloading gambling apps. Do you have more details on this? I hadn't heard this angle on the story before. I'm mildly surprised this is a concern Google has to have.
  - MSFT_Edging 11mo ago
    I'd have to look for it. At the very least, the pilot program is happening there, and I've read on here it's a big scam to have sideloaded gambling apps take people's life savings.
- jonahbenton 11mo ago
  I read the Omelas story differently but maybe is the same. It's just a predatory dominance play. Some people get the dopamine hit from dominance, so for them it is a double win- their stuff is funded by others and it is the "weakness" of others (perceived by the dominant) that produces the funding. Having and eating the cake, etc.
- harha 11mo ago
  I think it’s worth considering the alternate scenario of banning it and it happening illegally, which arguably is a worse outcome. This adds to the burden of finding what to ban, which may be different depending on who you ask.
BeFlatXIII 11mo ago
> no one is forced to do it Go tell that to joint bank accounts and family court.
- shadowgovt 11mo ago
  What does this comment mean?
  - jwiz 11mo ago
    If spouse-a has gambling addiction and spends all of the family money, then spouse-b was effectively forced to gamble.
- falseprofit 11mo ago
  Not being forced to open a joint account either… In all seriousness, all the pushback against paternalism comes from people who still believe in free will.
  - BeFlatXIII 11mo ago
    Were the children able to choose to be affected by their parents’ poor decisions?

rcpt 11mo ago

Taxing productive economic activity is bad

vinceguidry 11mo ago
That's... kinda ridiculous? It sounds like you're just against taxation period. How should a government fund itself?
- immibis 11mo ago
  Zero taxation is just as bad. There's a certain amount of taxation that has to be met, and it's best if it comes from as harmful activity as possible, because whatever gets taxed is discouraged. If there isn't enough harmful activity to meet tax needs, then start taxing normal activity.
  - majewsky 11mo ago
    > whatever gets taxed is discouraged Except when the behavior is too common, in which case it will become a relevant revenue source for the government, incentivizing them to encourage the vice. Case in point, here's the Japanese tax agency asking for ideas how to incentivize young people to drink more alcohol. https://soranews24.com/2022/08/17/japanese-government-worried-young-adults-arent-drinking-enough-alcohol/ https://soranews24.com/2022/08/17/japanese-government-worrie...
stouset 11mo ago
Having a government tax base funded significantly from the exploitation of addictive behavior and siphoning money away from productive consumptive purposes is also bad, but less easy to make a sound bite from.